ARISTOTLE'S POETICS

I

I propose to treat of Poetry in itself and of its various kinds, noting

the essential quality of each; to inquire into the structure of the plot

as requisite to a good poem; into the number and nature of the parts of

which a poem is composed; and similarly into whatever else falls within

the same inquiry. Following, then, the order of nature, let us begin

with the principles which come first.

Epic poetry and Tragedy, Comedy also and Dithyrambic: poetry, and the

music of the flute and of the lyre in most of their forms, are all in

their general conception modes of imitation. They differ, however, from

one: another in three respects,--the medium, the objects, the manner or

mode of imitation, being in each case distinct.

For as there are persons who, by conscious art or mere habit, imitate

and represent various objects through the medium of colour and form, or

again by the voice; so in the arts above mentioned, taken as a whole,

the imitation is produced by rhythm, language, or 'harmony,' either

singly or combined.

Thus in the music of the flute and of the lyre, 'harmony' and rhythm

alone are employed; also in other arts, such as that of the shepherd's

pipe, which are essentially similar to these. In dancing, rhythm alone

is used without 'harmony'; for even dancing imitates character, emotion,

and action, by rhythmical movement.

There is another art which imitates by means of language alone, and

that either in prose or verse--which, verse, again, may either combine

different metres or consist of but one kind--but this has hitherto been

without a name. For there is no common term we could apply to the mimes

of Sophron and Xenarchus and the Socratic dialogues on the one hand;

and, on the other, to poetic imitations in iambic, elegiac, or any

similar metre. People do, indeed, add the word 'maker' or 'poet' to

the name of the metre, and speak of elegiac poets, or epic (that is,

hexameter) poets, as if it were not the imitation that makes the poet,

but the verse that entitles them all indiscriminately to the name. Even

when a treatise on medicine or natural science is brought out in verse,

the name of poet is by custom given to the author; and yet Homer and

Empedocles have nothing in common but the metre, so that it would be

right to call the one poet, the other physicist rather than poet. On the

same principle, even if a writer in his poetic imitation were to combine

all metres, as Chaeremon did in his Centaur, which is a medley composed

of metres of all kinds, we should bring him too under the general term

poet. So much then for these distinctions.

There are, again, some arts which employ all the means above mentioned,

namely, rhythm, tune, and metre. Such are Dithyrambic and Nomic poetry,

and also Tragedy and Comedy; but between them the difference is, that in

the first two cases these means are all employed in combination, in the

latter, now one means is employed, now another.

Such, then, are the differences of the arts with respect to the medium

of imitation.

The Poetics of Aristotle · 第 6 / 29 题