The plot is not the play: play length and plot proportion in Aristotle’s Poetics.

I started my PhD research on the plots of Old Comedy, and in the process decided to look again at Aristotle’s Poetics. As I reread, I came up with a little theory about Aristotle’s discussion of plot that has not been proposed before. Below is a rough description of my idea.

In the Poetics, Aristotle uses two terms to describe extent: μῆκος and μέγεθος. Scholars have been largely unable to determine the difference between these two terms in the text, often concluding Aristotle uses them “interchangeably” (for example Elizabeth Belfiore, Dramatic and Epic Time: ‘Magnitude’ and ‘Length’ in Aristotle’s Poetics, in Making sense of Aristotle: essays in poetics, 2001). But the meaning of μῆκος is described by D. W. Lucas in his commentary as “one of the major problems of the Poetics.” The definition of μέγεθος is no less controversial, with some resorting to the translation of “grandeur” in at least one passage (1449a18, see for example Halliwell’s Loeb translation). Here I argue Aristotle assumes the plot could be shorter than the play, and these two terms reflect this: μῆκος refers to duration in any sense (play duration, number of lines, duration in fictional time, number of plot parts), and μέγεθος refers to the proportion of the plot in the entire play. This argument gains support from looking at the plots of Aristophanic comedies, which consistently feature plots that end about halfway through the play. That our own narrative habits assume the plot and play begin and end at the same time has probably obscured our understanding of these two terms in the Poetics.

I will first take all the instances of these two words in the text one by one and apply my hypothesis.

Section 1449a18:

ἔτι δὲ τὸ μέγεθος: ἐκ μικρῶν μύθων καὶ λέξεως γελοίας διὰ τὸ ἐκ σατυρικοῦ μεταβαλεῖν ὀψὲ ἀπεσεμνύνθη, τό τε μέτρον ἐκ τετραμέτρου ἰαμβεῖον ἐγένετο.

Some have translated μέγεθος as “grandeur” here, because the sentence continues to compare tragedy with the “laughable” Satyr play. But it could also mean the Satyr play featured a smaller proportion of plot (μικρῶν μύθων). As we will see with Aristophanic comedies, some comedies regularly featured a plot that was a much smaller proportion of the play. Aristotle is here assigning that feature to the Satyr play as well, instead of referring to the seriousness or “slightness” of their plots.

Section 1449b12:

ἔτι δὲ τῷ μήκει: ἡ μὲν ὅτι μάλιστα πειρᾶται ὑπὸ μίαν περίοδον ἡλίου εἶναι ἢ μικρὸν ἐξαλλάττειν, ἡ δὲ ἐποποιία ἀόριστος τῷ χρόνῳ καὶ τούτῳ διαφέρει, καί τοι τὸ πρῶτον ὁμοίως ἐν ταῖς τραγῳδίαις τοῦτο ἐποίουν καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἔπεσιν.

Commentators have debated whether μήκει here refers to the run-time of the play taking less than a day to perform or the fictional time in the play occurring within a single day. For my purposes, either definition is acceptable. μῆκος always refers to duration, and both fictional time or performance time are measured in duration, not proportion.

Section 1449b23:

ἔστιν οὖν τραγῳδία μίμησις πράξεως σπουδαίας καὶ τελείας μέγεθος ἐχούσης, ἡδυσμένῳ λόγῳ χωρὶς ἑκάστῳ τῶν εἰδῶν ἐν τοῖς μορίοις, δρώντων καὶ οὐ δι᾽ ἀπαγγελίας, δι᾽ ἐλέου καὶ φόβου περαίνουσα τὴν τῶν τοιούτων παθημάτων κάθαρσιν.

Section 1450b:

κεῖται δὴ ἡμῖν τὴν τραγῳδίαν τελείας καὶ ὅλης πράξεως εἶναι μίμησιν ἐχούσης τι μέγεθος: ἔστιν γὰρ ὅλον καὶ μηδὲν ἔχον μέγεθος. ὅλον δέ ἐστιν τὸ ἔχον ἀρχὴν καὶ μέσον καὶ τελευτήν.

These two passages both refer to the wholeness or completeness of the plot in relation to its μέγεθος. But why does Aristotle need to establish that a plot has some extent? How could any conceivable plot not have some extent? An indication is found in the second passage, where Aristotle states something can be whole without having a μέγεθος. Lucas explains Aristotle is describing “an entity so small that it has no meaningful dimensions”, and compares to Physics 266a10: Ὅτι δὲ τοῦτ’ ἀμερὲς ἀναγκαῖον εἶναι καὶ μηδὲν ἔχειν μέγεθος, νῦν λέγωμεν, πρῶτον περὶ τῶν προτέρων αὐτοῦ διορίσαντες. But in that passage from the Physics, the size of the entity in question is not established, only that it has no parts and no magnitude. Aristotle assumes that anything with magnitude must also be dividable into parts (see also for example Metaphysics 1020a, “λέγεται δὲ πλῆθος μὲν τὸ διαιρετὸν δυνάμει εἰς μὴ συνεχῆ, μέγεθος δὲ τὸ εἰς συνεχῆ”).

The following sentence in the passage then defines a whole plot as having three parts: a beginning, middle and an end. So a plot with μέγεθος is a plot with parts, and these parts are at least three. If we imagine a plot with a single part, it could conceivably be simply a single event. An event cannot be meaningfully divided into any parts in a play, and so cannot be described as a plot. Wholeness for a plot is not enough. It must take up some meaningful proportion of the play, and that for Aristotle means at least three events. So μέγεθος in this passage does not refer primarily to smallness of length as Lucas assumes, it refers to the plot’s proportion of the play.

Section 1450b – 51a:

ἔτι δ᾽ ἐπεὶ τὸ καλὸν καὶ ζῷον καὶ ἅπαν πρᾶγμα ὃ συνέστηκεν ἐκ τινῶν οὐ μόνον ταῦτα τεταγμένα δεῖ ἔχειν ἀλλὰ καὶ μέγεθος ὑπάρχειν μὴ τὸ τυχόν: τὸ γὰρ καλὸν ἐν μεγέθει καὶ τάξει ἐστίν, διὸ οὔτε πάμμικρον ἄν τι γένοιτο καλὸν ζῷον （συγχεῖται γὰρ ἡ θεωρία ἐγγὺς τοῦ ἀναισθήτου χρόνου γινομένη） οὔτε παμμέγεθες（οὐ γὰρ ἅμα ἡ θεωρία γίνεται ἀλλ᾽ οἴχεται τοῖς θεωροῦσι τὸ ἓν καὶ τὸ ὅλον ἐκ τῆς θεωρίας） οἷον εἰ μυρίων σταδίων εἴη ζῷον: ὥστε δεῖ καθάπερ ἐπὶ τῶν σωμάτων καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν ζῴων ἔχειν μὲν μέγεθος, τοῦτο δὲ εὐσύνοπτον εἶναι, οὕτω καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν μύθων ἔχειν μὲν μῆκος, τοῦτο δὲ εὐμνημόνευτον εἶναι.

In this comparison of the parts (τινῶν) of plots to the parts of animals, I would suggest the translation “proportions” for the all the instances of μέγεθος. The organization of the parts is important, but also their proportions. An animal with enormous proportions or tiny proportions escapes perception and so cannot be beautiful. The same is true of a plot. But Aristotle confusingly uses the word μῆκος in a parallel construction with μέγεθος in the last clause, as if they were equivalent. That is because μῆκος here is referring to the total number of parts in the plot, what we might call plot points. The number of parts in the plot is an absolute quantity and therefore has a μῆκος, while μέγεθος is only used to express proportion. So the question of whether a plot can be εὐσύνοπτον is not a function of its proportion of the play, the run-time of the play or the fictional time it covers. It is a function of how many parts it has. If it has too many parts, it becomes impossible to keep them all in mind at once.

As if himself aware that the use of μῆκος in this sentence may be confusing, Aristotle immediately follows this with an often misunderstood clarification of the relationship between plot length and play length:

Section 1451a:

τοῦ δὲ μήκους ὅρος <ὁ> μὲν πρὸς τοὺς ἀγῶνας καὶ τὴν αἴσθησιν οὐ τῆς τέχνης ἐστίν: εἰ γὰρ ἔδει ἑκατὸν τραγῳδίας ἀγωνίζεσθαι, πρὸς κλεψύδρας ἂν ἠγωνίζοντο, †ὥσπερ ποτὲ καὶ ἄλλοτέ φασιν†. ὁ δὲ κατ᾽ αὐτὴν τὴν φύσιν τοῦ πράγματος ὅρος, ἀεὶ μὲν ὁ μείζων μέχρι τοῦ σύνδηλος εἶναι καλλίων ἐστὶ κατὰ τὸ μέγεθος: ὡς δὲ ἁπλῶς διορίσαντας εἰπεῖν, ἐν ὅσῳ μεγέθει κατὰ τὸ εἰκὸς ἢ τὸ ἀναγκαῖον ἐφεξῆς γιγνομένων συμβαίνει εἰς εὐτυχίαν ἐκ δυστυχίας ἢ ἐξ εὐτυχίας εἰς δυστυχίαν μεταβάλλειν, ἱκανὸς ὅρος ἐστὶν τοῦ μεγέθους.

Now the distinction between the two terms is made clear. Aristotle states that the run-time (μήκους) of a play dictated by contests or the audience’s patience does not change the demands on the writer’s craft. Regardless of the run-time, the plot has natural limits. The best size for the plot is as large as possible proportionally within the play (κατὰ τὸ μέγεθος), so long as the whole does not escape perception (μέχρι τοῦ σύνδηλος) by having too many parts. The minimum limit of the plot proportion is one that allows a change of fortune for the characters. It is interesting that now Aristotle mentions a change of fortune instead of the beginning, middle and end minimum he established before. This must add to the minimum of beginning, middle and end offered above: the beginning and the end must also provide a contrast in fortunes.

Section 1456a:

χρὴ δὲ ὅπερ εἴρηται πολλάκις μεμνῆσθαι καὶ μὴ ποιεῖν ἐποποιικὸν σύστημα τραγῳδίαν (ἐποποιικὸν δὲ λέγω τὸ πολύμυθον) οἷον εἴ τις τὸν τῆς Ἰλιάδος ὅλον ποιοῖ μῦθον. ἐκεῖ μὲν γὰρ διὰ τὸ μῆκος λαμβάνει τὰ μέρη τὸ πρέπον μέγεθος, ἐνδὲ τοῖς δράμασι πολὺ παρὰ τὴν ὑπόληψιν ἀποβαίνει.

The question here is why the entire plot of an epic cannot be handled by a single tragedy. If the two terms μῆκος and μέγεθος are equivalent, the meaning of this passage is: “because of the length of epic, the parts of the plot can have the appropriate length”, which verges on a tautology. But if we translate “because of the length of epic, the parts of the plot can take up the appropriate proportion of the poem, but in drama the result is far from what was intended”, the point is altogether different. This means by constructing a tragedy from the plot of the Iliad, the problem is not necessarily that the episodes are too short. The problem is that there would be nothing but plot, and so the proportion of plot would be too high. The epic has enough room for a larger plot and the other elements appropriate to the genre.

Section 1456a – 56b:

ἔστι δὲ κατὰ τὴν διάνοιαν ταῦτα, ὅσα ὑπὸ τοῦ λόγου δεῖ παρασκευασθῆναι. μέρη δὲ τούτων τό τε ἀποδεικνύναι καὶ τὸ λύειν καὶ τὸ πάθη παρασκευάζειν（οἷον ἔλεον ἢ φόβον ἢ ὀργὴν καὶ ὅσα τοιαῦτα）καὶ ἔτι μέγεθος καὶ μικρότητας.

Here the subject is the parts of the element of tragedy Aristotle calls “speech”. This is another instance where scholars have resorted to “grandeur” or “importance” to translate μέγεθος . By translating “proportion”, the passage shows instead that the principle of proportion applies to other elements of the play. Since an important aspect of plot is its proportion of the play, it follows that the same would be true of other elements. Aristotle first distinguishes three parts of the element of speech: proof, refutation and producing emotions, then adds that this element as a whole can take up a larger proportion of the play (μέγεθος) or a smaller proportion (μικρότητας).

Section 1456b:

ταῦτα δὲ διαφέρει σχήμασίν τε τοῦ στόματος καὶ τόποις καὶ δασύτητι καὶ ψιλότητι καὶ μήκει καὶ βραχύτητι ἔτι δὲ ὀξύτητι καὶ βαρύτητι καὶ τῷ μέσῳ:

This use of μήκει in the discussion of syllable length shows that Aristotle consistently uses this word to mean only absolute duration.

Section 1459a:

διὸ ὥσπερ εἴπομεν ἤδη καὶ ταύτῃ θεσπέσιος ἂν φανείη Ὅμηρος παρὰ τοὺς ἄλλους, τῷ μηδὲ τὸν πόλεμον καίπερ ἔχοντα ἀρχὴν καὶ τέλος ἐπιχειρῆσαι ποιεῖν ὅλον: λίαν γὰρ ἂν μέγας καὶ οὐκ εὐσύνοπτος ἔμελλεν ἔσεσθαι ὁ μῦθος, ἢ τῷ μεγέθει μετριάζοντα καταπεπλεγμένον τῇ ποικιλίᾳ.

The words τῷ μεγέθει μετριάζοντα in the concluding phrase of the passage are commonly understood to refer to the length of the epic. For example, Lucas comments “the whole story of the Trojan War told in the compass of the Iliad would have been excessively compressed.” But a closer look at the passage shows it is not possible that the length of the poem is the subject of the last phrase. Aristotle writes that either the plot would be too big or it would be too compressed. Lucas interprets the passage as if Aristotle wrote either the poem would be too big or, if the poem was of a moderate length, the plot too compressed. Yet in the first phrase of the either/or proposition, the plot is explicitly the subject, not the poem. If the subject of the second phrase were the poem itself, then the either/or proposition makes no sense: either the plot is too big (but the poem is the normal length), or the poem is the normal length and the plot too compressed.

If however we understand the passage to be about the proportion of the plot to the entire poem, as we would expect since Aristotle writes μεγέθει, these difficulties disappear. The passage then states either the plot is too big, i.e. that it takes up far too great a proportion of the poem, or, if it takes up only a moderate proportion of the poem, then it is too compressed. This was the same problem Aristotle found above with using an entire epic plot for a tragedy, that its proportion in the play would be too high. So Aristotle assumes it is possible to tell the entire story of the Trojan War over the standard length of an epic, but then there would be no room for the other required elements of an epic.

Section 1459b:

διαφέρει δὲ κατά τε τῆς συστάσεως τὸ μῆκος ἡ ἐποποιία καὶ τὸ μέτρον. τοῦ μὲν οὖν μήκους ὅρος ἱκανὸς ὁ εἰρημένος: δύνασθαι γὰρ δεῖ συνορᾶσθαι τὴν ἀρχὴν καὶ τὸ τέλος. εἴη δ᾽ ἂν τοῦτο, εἰ τῶν μὲν ἀρχαίων ἐλάττους αἱ συστάσεις εἶεν, πρὸς δὲ τὸ πλῆθος τραγῳδιῶν τῶν εἰς μίαν ἀκρόασιν τιθεμένων παρήκοιεν. ἔχει δὲ πρὸς τὸ ἐπεκτείνεσθαι τὸ μέγεθος πολύ τι ἡ ἐποποιία ἴδιον διὰ τὸ ἐν μὲν τῇ τραγῳδίᾳ μὴ ἐνδέχεσθαι ἅμα πραττόμεναπολλὰ μέρη μιμεῖσθαι ἀλλὰ τὸ ἐπὶ τῆς σκηνῆς καὶ τῶν ὑποκριτῶν μέρος μόνον: ἐν δὲ τῇ ἐποποιίᾳ διὰ τὸ διήγησιν εἶναι ἔστι πολλὰ μέρη ἅμα ποιεῖν περαινόμενα, ὑφ᾽ ὧν οἰκείων ὄντων αὔξεται ὁ τοῦ ποιήματος ὄγκος.

In this chapter Aristotle is comparing epic and tragedy. The word σύστασις is frequently modified by τῶν πραγμάτων in the Poetics, meaning the construction of the plot. So in the first sentence we can assume the topic is the plot, not the length of the poem, as it is often translated. In addition, Aristotle refers back to the ὅρος defined above in 1451a, where we saw the subject is the number of parts of the plot, not poem length. Therefore, μῆκος here means the number of parts of the plot, and Aristotle is simply establishing that epic has more plot parts than tragedy, but that as with tragedy the maximum acceptable number of plot parts from beginning to end is determined by how many can be kept in mind at once. He goes on to define a rough general maximum for plot points: the amount of plot points that are contained in three typical tragedies.

This is commonly interpreted to refer instead to the actual run-time of three tragedies. Although the confusion is understandable given Aristotle’s use of μῆκος, the passage explicitly refers back to 1451a where the topic is parts of the plot and μῆκος was used in that context. In fact the passage would make less sense if it referred to performance time. That would mean that any epic that lasted about the length of three tragedies would satisfy the limit for plot. But Aristotle has also clearly stated in 1451a that length of performance is not related to correct plot length, so this interpretation is highly doubtful.

Aristotle follows this point with a description of how epic is able to accommodate a larger proportion of plot. The proportion of plot can be extended even further in epic because it can narrate more parts at once. This passage has been typically understood to mean epic can “describe in rapid succession a number of different events which happened at the same time”, as Lucas comments. But it is more likely Aristotle simply means διήγησισ can use language to refer to aggregate actions in a way that is impossible on stage, where every action must be physically played out. To take an example at random from the Iliad, here are the first two lines of Book 3:

αὐτὰρ ἐπεὶ κόσμηθεν ἅμ᾽ ἡγεμόνεσσιν ἕκαστοι,

Τρῶες μὲν κλαγγῇ τ᾽ ἐνοπῇ τ᾽ ἴσαν ὄρνιθες

This action of the entire Trojan army assembling and charging would take many minutes at a minimum on stage (if that were possible) or for example in a film. These actions must actually be shown, there is no way to gloss them over when the actors are physically in front of you. But in an epic, that can be passed over in two lines, and the rest is left to the imagination.

Whether parallel action is meant or not, this passage confirms that the subject of the previous sentence was parts of the plot, and not run-time. Here again Aristotle only discusses whether one part or many can be shown on stage conveniently, and how that effects the proportion of plot to other elements in the epic. Furthermore, his use of ὄγκος is particularly revealing. Although one meaning of the word is “dignity” and is certainly a correct translation, another more literal meaning is “volume”. Since Aristotle is talking about how much plot is filling the vessel of the play or epic, this word is particularly appropriate when we understand he is discussing plot proportion, not run-time or plot length.

Section 1462b:

ἔτι τῷ ἐν ἐλάττονι μήκει τὸ τέλος τῆς μιμήσεως εἶναι（τὸ γὰρ ἀθροώτερον ἥδιον ἢ πολλῷ κεκραμένον τῷ χρόνῳ, λέγω δ᾽ οἷον εἴ τις τὸν Οἰδίπουν θείη τὸν Σοφοκλέους ἐν ἔπεσιν ὅσοις ἡ Ἰλιάς）: ἔτι ἧττον μία ἡ μίμησις ἡ τῶν ἐποποιῶν（σημεῖον δέ, ἐκ γὰρ ὁποιασοῦν μιμήσεως πλείους τραγῳδίαι γίνονται）, ὥστε ἐὰν μὲν ἕνα μῦθον ποιῶσιν, ἢ βραχέως δεικνύμενον μύουρον φαίνεσθαι, ἢ ἀκολουθοῦντα τῷ τοῦ μέτρου μήκει ὑδαρῆ: λέγω δὲ οἷον ἐὰν ἐκ πλειόνων πράξεων ᾖ συγκειμένη, ὥσπερ ἡ Ἰλιὰς ἔχει πολλὰ τοιαῦτα μέρη καὶ ἡ Ὀδύσσεια <ἃ> καὶ καθ᾽ ἑαυτὰ ἔχει μέγεθος: καίτοι ταῦτα τὰ ποιήματα συνέστηκεν ὡς ἐνδέχεται ἄριστα καὶ ὅτι μάλιστα μιᾶς πράξεως μίμησις.

In the beginning of the passage, μῆκος is now again simply run-time. Aristotle explicitly tells us that by referring to the number of lines and directly to time. The reason an epic with a single plot would be diluted or too short is a question of proportion: because a single plot has too few plot points, either the proportion is correct and the epic too short (perhaps the length of a tragedy), or the epic is the correct length and the proportion too low. The use of the word for diluted is similar to the use of the word for volume above, in that it clearly shows proportion in the most literal sense is Aristotle’s concern. The conclusion of the passage simply establishes that an epic achieves the correct plot proportion by adding plot sections each of some smaller proportion (καθ᾽ ἑαυτὰ ἔχει μέγεθος).

By defining the terms μῆκος and μέγεθος in the Poetics in terms of proportion, we gain a clearer and, in some ways, completely new picture of Aristotle’s understanding of plot. The plot is not ubiquitous in the play, yet some proportion of the play must be plot. Other elements such as speech also have certain proportions in the play. The proportion of plot should not to be too high or too low, though more plot is always more desirable within the limits Aristotle describes. A plot must have a minimum of three parts, a beginning middle and an end, with the end showing a change in fortune from the beginning. But a plot with too many parts escapes perception and should be avoided.

In addition, this analysis solves several problems in the text. It explains why Aristotle uses two different terms, μῆκος and μέγεθος, when discussing extent. It makes the somewhat awkward and inconsistent translation of μέγεθος as “grandeur” no longer necessary. And it clarifies several questions that have persistently confused scholars, such as why Aristotle refers to plays timed by a water clock in 1451a.

There are also an important group of ancient plays that, unlike most modern examples, have plots that end before the play. The second half of comedies by Aristophanes typically consist of “revue-like scenes which do not advance the plot, which is often effectively concluded before the parabasis” as Henderson writes in his Loeb introduction. This has also been observed by other commentators, for example Whittaker (1935) and Zimmermann (2006). That curious feature of Aristophanic comedy is too consistent to be accidental or novel to ancient audiences. It is clear that Greek audiences had different expectations when it came to plot proportions than we do today. Given that is the case, it would be surprising if Aristotle’s discussion of plot did not address this special feature of the narrative of his time and the ramifications it has on overall construction in various genres. These two terms illustrate that Aristotle did discuss these issues in the Poetics.

Advertisement