Imitatio Reflection
This assignment was an interesting way to look at speeches by ancient rhetors throughout which there were both positive and negative aspects involved in the work required in an effort to properly complete all parts of the assignment. By analyzing and imitating a speech I found that I was forced to pay much more attention to the methods used in the formation of rhetoric. After participating in this assignment I also found that certain methods of ancient rhetors could most definitely be applied to modern times in that they make more well thought out quality writing because of the attention to detail required to use some techniques employed by ancient rhetors. There were some portions of this assignment which I had a little difficulty with, but overall it was a good experience.
From this experience I learned that the ways of ancient rhetors can most definitely translate into modern times. Both in constructing my own speech and listening to others I found them considerably more well constructed than I am typically used to when listening to presentations in class. The phenomena of more well constructed speeches was probably due to our focus on what tools the rhetors we were imitating used in their original speeches. By analyzing then imitating another’s speech it forced us to be hyper aware of the construction and what was being used to construct a solid discussion of the topic.
Through this exercise of really looking into how ancient rhetors constructed their speeches I realized how little attention modern students may pay to the underlying rhetorical devices which could potentially make any writing or presentation considerably more worthwhile. The work of ancient rhetors applies to today simply in that they carefully constructed their work, paying attention to every minute detail in a way that has since fallen to the wayside and potentially should be revived, at least to some extent. On the other hand, through close imitation some of the speeches turned out a little drier and long winded than they necessarily needed to be, so maybe a balance of newer methods and older techniques could be the best approach. One example of a device I found in the original work and then imitated in my speech was a rhetorical question which was at the end of the section.
One thing that I had trouble with during this assignment was the imitation and knowing how close to the original was too close; so to be safe I imitated the construction as much as possible while trying to use different words. There were some portions of the speech where I found it would be possible for me to simply use the same words as the ancient rhetor, in that they would fit the purposes of my speech as well, but instead I tried to find the best possible way to formulate the speech for my purpose using a similar construction; such as comparing two things as a positive and negative, but in different terms. I wanted my work to be my own not simply a copy of an ancient rhetoric. While working on my imitation I found there seems to be a fine line between copying and imitating another’s work, of course I stayed on the imitating side, but it took focus. Even now with the imitation written and performed there are some sections I am worried are a little too close to the original.
When finding the work to imitate I also ended up changing my choice a number of times in order to find a speech which I could both imitate effectively and create a new speech in that imitation which would hopefully be interesting to the class. In the end I chose a work by Aristotle which was already broken into sections so that I could choose a section, or in actuality two sections, to imitate; rather than trying to choose a piece randomly out of an entire speech. By choosing a work already broken into sections I was able to choose three potential sections of the work to really look at and from there I decided which I thought I would be most comfortable and successful imitating. The work that I ended up choosing was a section, or rather two sections, from Aristotle’s Poetics, the two sections were headed “Practical Rules for the Tragic Poet” and “Further Rules for the Tragic Poet.” In my attempt to make my speech somewhat interesting for the class I chose the topic of procrastination and wrote my speech with the idea of Practical Rules for the Modern Procrastinator as a working title in my head; overall my speech was somewhat meant to be more humorous than serious. To support my speech I thought about the ways I and those around me procrastinate and what makes it take more or less time to actually complete homework and used these things as support. One thing I am sure of with my speech is I used what many see as typical procrastination techniques, I know this because I was not the only to give a speech on procrastination and sections of our speeches were quite similar.
Another difficulty I had with this assignment was in the presentation. I have some trouble talking in front of others and the more invested my ideas or thoughts are in the assignment the more trouble I have. In the presentation I had trouble not hiding behind my speech through reading it straight off the paper, and was further distracted by the people in the classroom who were talking to each other while I was speaking. It was a further good experience to present this in front of the class but not one that came easily.
Overall this assignment was a rather interesting one. In some aspects the assignment could be seen as difficult while being not so. For example, though it was difficult to know if I was missing anything important in my analysis, or how much was enough of an imitation or analysis, I found that neither of the steps of imitation of analysis were particularly difficult on their own. This assignment allowed me to really look in depth at the way works were constructed by ancient rhetors and really get a sense of the minute detail that went into their work. I gained a deeper understanding of ancient rhetors through this assignment and recognize the learning potential that was involved, though the assignment itself did not always particularly appeal to me.
Imitatio
In constructing the strategies to avoid work with the proper determination, the student should place their homework, as far as possible, in the future. In this way, seeing everything as not immediate, as if they have plenty of time, they will manage to avoid it, and be unlikely to properly begin. The need of such a rule is shown by the ability to do homework long before the deadline.
Again, the student should work out when homework has to be done, to the best of their power, with appropriate timing; for those who may need longer to finish English; and one who needs longer for math. Hence procrastination either produces the reward of time or the penalty of undue stress. In one case the student can find time for their personal life; in another, it necessitates proper focus later.
As for the methods, whether the student uses others or finds new ways for themselves, they should give themselves a general timeline, and then stretch this with various time wasters.
After this, it remains to stretch the homework schedule with time wasters. Students must ensure they work best for their procrastination. In the case of some, for example, there is obsession with facebook which led to their lost time, and their inclusion by means of social information. In this method, the task is simple, but it is such simple tasks which give waste to time.
Every procrastination falls into two parts, -- that which is Productive and Unproductive. Methods which accomplish some goal or finish some piece of the homework form the Productive; the rest is the Unproductive. By Productive I mean all that is the least bit positive for one to do. The Unproductive is that which is not Productive. Thus, when a student checks their e-mail, the Productive consists of the need to check ones e-mail and sort such and then again the Unproductive extends from using e-mail to chat and so on.
There are four kinds of Procrastination, the Simple, where simple tasks are done between short bursts of homework; the Blatant (where it is clear the goal is procrastination),-- such as through watching television; Distractions (depending entirely on outside sources),-- such as opening the window Saturday nights to allow the noises of people enjoying the weekend to prevent focus. The fourth kind is the productive, accomplished by making food and the like. The procrastinator should try, if possible, to combine several procrastination techniques; or failing that, those which will waste their time most effectively. For whereas there have hitherto been everyday procrastinators, each of their own style, few have managed to reach the level of an art form.
In speaking of procrastination, the best test to take is with simple homework. Identify which is the least likely to cause stress when put off and procrastinate to the best of abilities. Thus when more difficult homework comes along the procrastinator knows the best means.
The homework too should be regarded with utmost consideration; it should be an essential piece of the entire procrastination, and share in the time, in a manner which finishes it eventually. As for those who do not consider the homework, their procrastination can cause more stress than that of actually doing the homework. They are, therefore, those who look panicked and weary in class. Yet what a difference there is in mood when procrastination is done successfully?
Work Imitated
XVII Practical rules for the Tragic Poet.
In constructing the plot and working it out with the proper diction, the poet should place the scene, as far as possible, before his eyes. In this way, seeing everything with the utmost vividness, as if he were a spectator of the action, he will discover what is in keeping with it, and be most unlikely to overlook inconsistencies. The need of such a rule is shown by the fault found in Carcinus. Amphiaraus was on his way from the temple. This fact escaped the observation of one who did not see the situation. On the stage, however, the piece failed, the audience being offended at the oversight.
Again, the poet should work out his play, to the best of his power, with appropriate gestures; for those who feel emotion are most convincing through natural sympathy with the characters they represent; and one who is agitated storms, one who is angry rages, with the most life-like reality. Hence poetry implies either a happy gift of nature or a strain of madness. In the one case a man can take the mould of any character; in the other, he is lifted out of his proper self.
As for the story, whether the poet takes it ready made or constructs it for himself, he should first sketch its general outline, and then fill in the episodes and amplify in detail. The general plan may be illustrated by the Iphigenia. A young girl is sacrificed; she disappears mysteriously from the eyes of those who sacrificed her; She is transported to another country, where the custom is to offer up all strangers to the goddess. To this ministry she is appointed. Some time later her own brother chances to arrive. The fact that the oracle for some reason ordered him to go there, is outside the general plan of the play. The purpose, again, of his coming is outside the action proper. However, he comes, he is seized, and, when on the point of being sacrificed, reveals who he is. The mode of recognition may be either that of Euripides or of Polyidus, in whose play he exclaims very naturally:--'So it was not my sister only, but I too, who was doomed to be sacrificed'; and by that remark he is saved.
After this, the names being once given, it remains to fill in the episodes. We must see that they are relevant to the action. In the case of Orestes, for example, there is the madness which led to his capture, and his deliverance by means of the purificatory rite. In the drama, the episodes are short, but it is these that give extension to Epic poetry. Thus the story of the Odyssey can be stated briefly. A certain man is absent from home for many years; he is jealously watched by Poseidon, and left desolate. Meanwhile his home is in a wretched plight---suitors are wasting his substance and plotting against his son. At length, tempest-tost, he himself arrives; he makes certain persons acquainted with him; he attacks the suitors with his own hand, and is himself preserved while he destroys them. This is the essence of the plot; the rest is episode.
XVIII Further rules for the Tragic Poet.
Every tragedy falls into two parts,--Complication and Unravelling or Denouement. Incidents extraneous to the action are frequently combined with a portion of the action proper, to form the Complication; the rest is the Unravelling. By the Complication I mean all that extends from the beginning of the action to the part which marks the turning-point to good or bad fortune. The Unravelling is that which extends from the beginning of the change to the end. Thus, in the Lynceus of Theodectes, the Complication consists of the incidents presupposed in the drama, the seizure of the child, and then again * * extends from the accusation of murder to the end.
There are four kinds of Tragedy, the Complex, depending entirely on Reversal of the Situation and Recognition; the Pathetic (where the motive is passion),--such as the tragedies on Ajax and Ixion; the Ethical (where the motives are ethical),--such as the Phthiotides and the Peleus. The fourth kind is the Simple , exemplified by the Phorcides, the Prometheus, and scenes laid in Hades. The poet should endeavour, if possible, to combine all poetic elements; or failing that, the greatest number and those the most important; the more so, in face of the cavilling criticism of the day. For whereas there have hitherto been good poets, each in his own branch, the critics now expect one man to surpass all others in their several lines of excellence.
In speaking of a tragedy as the same or different, the best test to take is the plot. Identity exists where the Complication and Unravelling are the same. Many poets tie the knot well, but unravel it ill. Both arts, however, should always be mastered.
Again, the poet should remember what has been often said, and not make an Epic structure into a Tragedy--by an Epic structure I mean one with a multiplicity of plots--as if, for instance, you were to make a tragedy out of the entire story of the Iliad. In the Epic poem, owing to its length, each part assumes its proper magnitude. In the drama the result is far from answering to the poet's expectation. The proof is that the poets who have dramatised the whole story of the Fall of Troy, instead of selecting portions, like Euripides; or who have taken the whole tale of Niobe, and not a part of her story, like Aeschylus, either fail utterly or meet with poor success on the stage. Even Agathon has been known to fail from this one defect. In his Reversals of the Situation, however, he shows a marvellous skill in the effort to hit the popular taste,--to produce a tragic effect that satisfies the moral sense. This effect is produced when the clever rogue, like Sisyphus, is outwitted, or the brave villain defeated. Such an event is probable in Agathon's sense of the word: 'it is probable,' he says, 'that many things should happen contrary to probability.'
The Chorus too should be regarded as one of the actors; it should be an integral part of the whole, and share in the action, in the manner not of Euripides but of Sophocles. As for the later poets, their choral songs pertain as little to the subject of the piece as to that of any other tragedy. They are, therefore, sung as mere interludes, a practice first begun by Agathon. Yet what difference is there between introducing such choral interludes, and transferring a speech, or even a whole act, from one play to another?
No comments:
Post a Comment