How Modern Literature and Shakespeare Rebelliously Demonstrate Nonconformity Toward Traditional Definitions of Tragedy and Comedy

Shakespeare was a famous English playwright and poet who lived from 1564 to 1616. He holds the reputation of being one of the greatest English writers because of his plays. His plays typically are written with five scenes that come together to form a story that follows the traditional plot structure. His first act most often gives the audience a lot of background information, oftentimes for the drunkards’ benefit. Shakespeare’s masterful usage of language includes colorful insults, dramatic irony and poetic monologues. His plays, best divided into three categories, tragedy, comedy, and historical, are appreciated internationally. In Shakespeare’s tragedies, many or even most characters will die. However, some of his most famous works do not actually meet the requirements of their respective genres when held against classical definitions laid by Aristotle. Aristotle defines tragedy and comedy both as forms of literary mimesis, art used to represent the real world, which serve to exemplify an action, complete with beginning, middle, and end, all “linked by necessary and probable causes” (Golden 1). Tragedy is defined by Aristotle as the mimesis that provides intellectual pleasure through pity and fear. Using reversal of fortune, tragedy evokes pity for the protagonist in the audience, and with the audience’s recognition of similarities between themselves and the fallen protagonist evokes fear. The primary catalyst for all things tragic is the nature of hamartia, the “tragic mistake or flaw” (Golden 1) of the protagonist, who ideally is a “noble or morally good” (Golden 1) character. Because of this mistake or flaw, the protagonist falls from good fortune, causing the audience to have pity for the unfortunate outcome. The best traged...

... middle of paper ...

...ical tragedy are found in modern literature. What is not considered a tragedy at all using modern standards may have been hailed as the best example of all tragedy by classical authors from five hundred years ago. Much modern literature unintentionally is written containing the classical standards, simply because these elements are so timeless in nature. As Juliet said, “…a rose / By any other name would smell as sweet” (Shakespeare Act 2 Scene 2). Though they now are recognized under different names and contexts, the elements shared by classical and modern literature hold just as much importance and provide just as much intellectual pleasure in each. Just as the literal meanings of words change over time, so do the standards of interpretation. By changing expectations and thinking just a bit differently, writers push the boundaries of greatness of this language.