tessa koveleski emily beaver

Things fall apart

Tessa Koveleski, Emily Beaver

Question

Is the book Things Fall Apart an Aristotelian tragedy?

Argument

In act I of Things Fall Apart, it is not an Aristotelian Tragedy, but in acts II and III, it is an Aristotelian Tragedy.

Argument of Act I

In act I, the author goes all over the place talking about Okonkwo’s life and the things he has done. It doesn’t have a steady plot. It goes from talking about his father to the wrestling match.

Why isn’t that an Aristotelian Tragedy?

Aristotelian tragedies always have a steady plot and shouldn’t jump from one plot from the next. They must have a beginning, middle, and end.

Act I arguments

In Act I, nobody really has anything serious they have to do. Mainly it is just setting up a plot.

Why isn’t that an Aristotelian Tragedy?

Aristotelian tragedies have to be in all seriousness and importance rather than being silly or relaxed. Also it is supposed to be dramatized.

Act II and III arguments

Act II and III is an Aristotelian Tragedy, because the plot finally begins in Act II when okonkwo gets sent out. The plot carries out through act II and III.

Act II and III arguments

The plot doesn’t jump around, it stays steady from beginning, to middle, to end.

Conclusion

Act I is more of a setup for a Aristotelian tragedy rather than being one. The plot actually begins in act II and carries out the Aristotelian Tragedy through the rest of the book.