<p><SPAN name="link2H_4_0017" id="link2H_4_0017"></SPAN></p>
<h2> 15 </h2>
<p>In the Characters there are four points to aim at. First and foremost,
that they shall be good. There will be an element of character in the
play, if (as has been observed) what a personage says or does reveals a
certain moral purpose; and a good element of character, if the purpose so
revealed is good. Such goodness is possible in every type of personage,
even in a woman or a slave, though the one is perhaps an inferior, and the
other a wholly worthless being. The second point is to make them
appropriate. The Character before us may be, say, manly; but it is not
appropriate in a female Character to be manly, or clever. The third is to
make them like the reality, which is not the same as their being good and
appropriate, in our sense of the term. The fourth is to make them
consistent and the same throughout; even if inconsistency be part of the
man before one for imitation as presenting that form of character, he
should still be consistently inconsistent. We have an instance of baseness
of character, not required for the story, in the Menelaus in <i>Orestes</i>;
of the incongruous and unbefitting in the lamentation of Ulysses in <i>Scylla</i>,
and in the (clever) speech of Melanippe; and of inconsistency in <i>Iphigenia
at Aulis</i>, where Iphigenia the suppliant is utterly unlike the later
Iphigenia. The right thing, however, is in the Characters just as in the
incidents of the play to endeavour always after the necessary or the
probable; so that whenever such-and-such a personage says or does
such-and-such a thing, it shall be the probable or necessary outcome of
his character; and whenever this incident follows on that, it shall be
either the necessary or the probable consequence of it. From this one sees
(to digress for a moment) that the Denouement also should arise out of the
plot itself, arid not depend on a stage-artifice, as in <i>Medea</i>, or
in the story of the (arrested) departure of the Greeks in the <i>Iliad</i>.
The artifice must be reserved for matters outside the play—for past
events beyond human knowledge, or events yet to come, which require to be
foretold or announced; since it is the privilege of the Gods to know
everything. There should be nothing improbable among the actual incidents.
If it be unavoidable, however, it should be outside the tragedy, like the
improbability in the <i>Oedipus</i> of Sophocles. But to return to the
Characters. As Tragedy is an imitation of personages better than the
ordinary man, we in our way should follow the example of good
portrait-painters, who reproduce the distinctive features of a man, and at
the same time, without losing the likeness, make him handsomer than he is.
The poet in like manner, in portraying men quick or slow to anger, or with
similar infirmities of character, must know how to represent them as such,
and at the same time as good men, as Agathon and Homer have represented
Achilles.</p>
<p>All these rules one must keep in mind throughout, and further, those also
for such points of stage-effect as directly depend on the art of the poet,
since in these too one may often make mistakes. Enough, however, has been
said on the subject in one of our published writings.</p>
<p><SPAN name="link2H_4_0018" id="link2H_4_0018"></SPAN></p>
<h2> 16 </h2>
<p>Discovery in general has been explained already. As for the species of
Discovery, the first to be noted is (1) the least artistic form of it, of
which the poets make most use through mere lack of invention, Discovery by
signs or marks. Of these signs some are congenital, like the 'lance-head
which the Earth-born have on them', or 'stars', such as Carcinus brings in
in his <i>Thyestes</i>; others acquired after birth—these latter
being either marks on the body, e.g. scars, or external tokens, like
necklaces, or to take another sort of instance, the ark in the Discovery
in <i>Tyro</i>. Even these, however, admit of two uses, a better and a
worse; the scar of Ulysses is an instance; the Discovery of him through it
is made in one way by the nurse and in another by the swineherds. A
Discovery using signs as a means of assurance is less artistic, as indeed
are all such as imply reflection; whereas one bringing them in all of a
sudden, as in the <i>Bath-story</i>, is of a better order. Next after
these are (2) Discoveries made directly by the poet; which are inartistic
for that very reason; e.g. Orestes' Discovery of himself in <i>Iphigenia</i>:
whereas his sister reveals who she is by the letter, Orestes is made to
say himself what the poet rather than the story demands. This, therefore,
is not far removed from the first-mentioned fault, since he might have
presented certain tokens as well. Another instance is the 'shuttle's
voice' in the <i>Tereus</i> of Sophocles. (3) A third species is Discovery
through memory, from a man's consciousness being awakened by something
seen or heard. Thus in <i>The Cyprioe</i> of Dicaeogenes, the sight of the
picture makes the man burst into tears; and in the <i>Tale of Alcinous</i>,
hearing the harper Ulysses is reminded of the past and weeps; the
Discovery of them being the result. (4) A fourth kind is Discovery through
reasoning; e.g. in <i>The Choephoroe</i>: 'One like me is here; there is
no one like me but Orestes; he, therefore, must be here.' Or that which
Polyidus the Sophist suggested for <i>Iphigenia</i>; since it was natural
for Orestes to reflect: 'My sister was sacrificed, and I am to be
sacrificed like her.' Or that in the <i>Tydeus</i> of Theodectes: 'I came
to find a son, and am to die myself.' Or that in <i>The Phinidae</i>: on
seeing the place the women inferred their fate, that they were to die
there, since they had also been exposed there. (5) There is, too, a
composite Discovery arising from bad reasoning on the side of the other
party. An instance of it is in <i>Ulysses the False Messenger</i>: he said
he should know the bow—which he had not seen; but to suppose from
that that he would know it again (as though he had once seen it) was bad
reasoning. (6) The best of all Discoveries, however, is that arising from
the incidents themselves, when the great surprise comes about through a
probable incident, like that in the <i>Oedipus</i> of Sophocles; and also
in <i>Iphigenia</i>; for it was not improbable that she should wish to
have a letter taken home. These last are the only Discoveries independent
of the artifice of signs and necklaces. Next after them come Discoveries
through reasoning.</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />