Everything about Hamartia totally explained
Hamartia (
Ancient Greek: ἁμαρτία) is a term developed by Aristotle in his work
Poetics. The term can simply be seen as a character’s flaw or error. The word hamartia is rooted in the notion of missing the mark (hamartanein) and covers a broad spectrum that includes accident and mistake, as well as wrongdoing, error, or sin.. In
Nicomachean Ethics, hamartia is described by Aristotle as one of the three kinds of injuries that a person can commit against another person. Hamartia is an injury committed in ignorance (when the person affected or the results are not what the agent supposed they were).
According to J. L. Moles, when a hamartia appears in a work it's often associated with the main character. The main character, additionally, must be of an upper status and have great fortune so that the characters change
in prosperity may be more extreme and visible . Such tragic flaws or errors are often found in kings, tyrants, and other members among the elect. Moles goes on to explain that this change in a central figure “arouses requisite pity or fear from the audience” . The greater a hefty and unfortunate change is in a play, the more ‘pity’ and ‘fear’ one draws from the audience. This is why a drastic change for the worse is often the mark of a good drama.
This form of drawing emotion from the audience is a staple of the Greek tragedies. In Greek tragedy, stories that contain a character with a hamartia often follow a similar blueprint. The hamartia, as stated, is seen as an error in judgment or unwitting mistake is applied to the actions of the hero. For example, the hero might attempt to achieve a certain objective X; by making an error in judgment, however, the hero instead achieves the opposite of X, with disastrous consequences.
However, hamartia can't be sharply defined or have an exact meaning assigned to it. Consequently, a number of alternate interpretations have been associated with it, such as in the
Bible hamartia is the Greek word used to denote "
sin." Bible translators may reach this conclusion, according to T. C. W. Stinton, because another common interpretation of hamartia can be seen as a “moral deficit” or a “moral error” (Stinton 221). R. D. Dawe disagrees with Stinton’s view when he points out in some cases hamartia can even mean to not sin (Dawe 91). It can be seen in this opposing context if the main character doesn't carry out an action because it's a sin. This failure to act, in turn, must lead to a poor change in fortune for the main character in order for it to truly be a hamartia. Also, in a medical context, a hamartia denotes a focal malformation consisting of disorganized arrangement of tissue types that are normally present in the anatomical area.
History of Hamartia
Aristotle first introduced hamartia in his book “Poetics of Aristotle.” In this book he explained the meaning of the word, which is “tragic flaws.” However through the years the word has changed meanings. Many scholars have argued that the meaning of the word that was given in Aristotle’s book, isn't really the correct meaning, and that there's a deeper meaning behind the word. In the article “ Tragic Error in the Poetics of Aristotle,” a scholar by the name of J.M. Bremer, first explained the general argument of the poetics and in particular, the immediate context of the term, he then traces the semasiological history of the hamart-group of the words from Homer, (who was another scholar who was trying to figure out the meaning behind the word) and Aristotle and he concluded that of the three possible meanings of hamartia (missing, error, offence), the Stagirite uses the second in our passage of Poetics. It is, then a “tragic error, for example a wrong action committed in ignorance of its nature, effect, etc., which is the starting point of a causally connected train of events ending in disaster. Today the word and it’s meaning is still up in the air; even so the word is still being used in many plays today.
Greek tragedy
In
Greek tragedy, the concept of
hamartia as an error in judgment or unwitting mistake is applied to the actions of the hero. For example, the hero might attempt to achieve a certain objective X; by making an error in judgment, however, the hero instead achieves the opposite of X, with disastrous consequences. Aristotle cites the example of
Oedipus, who acts to prevent the fulfillment of the prediction that he'd kill his father and marry his mother, but by his actions instead causes those very things to happen. In other cases, a hero might undertake an action with no real objective in mind, but which has disastrous consequences unforeseen by the hero; Aristotle cites the example of
Thyestes, who attends a banquet to reconcile with his brother Atreus, not knowing that he's being fed his own children. In terms of plot mechanics, the hero's
hamartia is the cause of his
peripeteia, or reversal of fortune. The Greek word also relates to drama techniques and themes used for theatre and play.
Major Examples of Hamartia in Literature
Hamartia is often referred to as tragic flaw and has many examples throughout literature, especially in Greek tragedy. Isabel Hyde discusses the type of hamartia Aristotle meant to define in the Modern Language Review, “Thus it may be said by some writers to be the ‘tragic flaw’ of Oedipus that he was hasty in temper; of Samson that he was sensually uxorious; of Macbeth that he was ambitious; of Othello that he was proud and jealous-and so on… but these things don't constitute the ‘hamartia of those characters in Aristotle’s sense” (Hyde 321). This explains that Aristotle didn't describe hamartia as an error of character, but as a moral mistake or ignorant error. Even J.L. Moles comments on the idea that hamartia is considered an error and states, “the modern view (at least until recently) that it means ‘error’, ‘mistake of fact’, that is, an act done in ignorance of some salient circumstances” (Moles 49).
Hyde goes on to question the meaning of true hamartia and discovers that it's in fact error in the article, “The Tragic Flaw: Is It a Tragic Error?” She claims that the true hamartia that occurs in Oedipus is considered “his ignorance of his true parentage” that led him to become “unwittingly the slayer of his own father” (Hyde 322). This example can be applied when reading literature in regards to the true definition of hamartia and helps place the character’s actions into the categories of character flaws and simple mistakes all humans commit. Within Oedipus, it's apparent that these errors are the result of hamartia caused by the gods and these tragic actions occur because tragedy has been willed upon the characters. R.D. Dawe brings this use of hamartia in literature to the forefront in the article “Some Reflections on Ate and Hamartia” found in Harvard’s Studies of Classical Philology. For instance, “this hamartia is in reality as predestined as the incest and parricide and belongs to the category of the ‘forced error’… from the artistic point of view it provides the satisfactory illusion of a voluntary choice” (Dawe 118-119). This forced error is caused by the gods and the hamartia the characters engage in has been predestined since their birth.
Another example of true hamartia in Greek tragedy is Antigone. Although she's been presented with the decree from her Uncle not to bury her brother and her obsession with her dead family ties initially gets her in trouble, the true hamartia or “error” in this tragedy rests on Creon. It occurs when he orders his men to properly bury Polynices before releasing Antigone which can be identified as the mistake or error that led to her death. Creon’s own ignorance causes the hamartia that results in Antigone’s death and Dawe agrees here, “Creon believed himself to be acting rightly in the interests of the city. Antigone, Haemon, Tiresias, the chorus and Creon himself (post eventum) recognize that he's in fact mistaken” (Dawe 113). Many characters have flaws that influence their decisions to act in a certain way yet they make mistakes, only to realize them later. True Aristotelian hamartia arises when mistakes or errors cause the plot or direction of action to change in a tragic way as described in the tragedies of Antigone and Oedipus.
"Tragic flaw"
While the modern popular rendering of
hamartia as "tragic flaw" (or "fatal flaw") is broadly imprecise and often misleading, it can't be ruled out that the term as Aristotle understood it could sometimes at least partially connote a failure of morals or character:
Whether Aristotle regards the “flaw” as intellectual or moral has been hotly discussed. It may cover both senses. The hero must not deserve his misfortune, but he must cause it by making a fatal mistake, an error of judgement, which may well involve some imperfection of character but not such as to make us regard him as “morally responsible” for the disasters although they're nevertheless the consequences of the flaw in him, and his wrong decision at a crisis is the inevitable outcome of his character (cf. Aristot. Poet. 6.24.).
Aeschylus'
The Persians provides a good example of one's character contributing to his
hamartia.
Xerxes' error would be his decision to invade Greece, as this invasion ends disastrously for him and Persia. Yet this error is inextricably bound up in Xerxes' chief character flaw: his
hubris. A morally-tinged understanding of
hamartia such as this can and has been applied to the protagonist of virtually every Greek tragedy. For example, Peter Struck comments on
Oedipus the King:
The complex nature of Oedipus' "hamartia," is also important. The Greek term "hamartia," typically translated as "tragic flaw," actually is closer in meaning to a "mistake" or an "error," "failing," rather than an innate flaw. In Aristotle's understanding, all tragic heroes have a "hamartia," but this isn't inherent in their characters, for then the audience would lose respect for them and be unable to pity them; likewise, if the hero's failing were entirely accidental and involuntary, the audience wouldn't fear for the hero. Instead, the character's flaw must result from something that's also a central part of their virtue, which goes somewhat awry, usually due to a lack of knowledge. By defining the notion this way, Aristotle indicates that a truly tragic hero must have a failing that's neither idiosyncratic nor arbitrary, but is somehow more deeply imbedded -- a kind of human failing and human weakness. Oedipus fits this precisely, for his basic flaw is his lack of knowledge about his own identity. Moreover, no amount of foresight or preemptive action could remedy Oedipus' hamartia; unlike other tragic heroes, Oedipus bears no responsibility for his flaw. The audience fears for Oedipus because nothing he does can change the tragedy's outcome.
Thus, while the concept of
hamartia as an exclusively moral or personal failing is foreign to Greek tragedy, the connotation isn't entirely absent.
Nevertheless, to import the notion of Hamartia as "tragic flaw" into the act of doing literary analysis locks the critic into a kind of endless blame game, an attitude of superiority, and a process of speculation about what the character could or (worse) should have done differently. Tragedy often works precisely because the protagonist in choosing good, chooses something that will lead to unhappiness. This is certainly the case with Oedipus and, arguably, the case with Hamlet.
Medicine
In a medical context, a hamartia denotes a focal malformation consisting of disorganized arrangement of tissue types that are normally present in the anatomical area. A hamartia isn't considered to be a tumor, and is distinct from a
hamartoma, which describes a benign neoplasm characterized by tissue misarrangement similar to a hamartia (for example tissue types that are typical of the area but arranged in an atypical manner).
Criticisms
Aristotle's Poetics terms have been used for centuries to enhance drama works, however some authors believe hamartia is sometimes incorrectly used. According to R.D. Dawe of Harvard's Study in Classical Philology, "In particular hamartia appears inaccurate when measured against the events in Oedipus Rex, a play which is clearly in the forefront of Aristotle's mind throughout the Poetics, and which he mentions by name in the present context" (Dawe 90). He continues to say readers have a choice "etiher hamartia in Aristotle's discussion has a meaning unknown from any of its other very frequent occurences in Greek Literature (including Aristotle himself) and Aristotle hasn't seen fit to add a word to of clarification to his casual introduction of this novel concept: or else his words have almost no relevance in Greek as it was actually practiced..." (Dawe 91). Lastly, Dawe points out that Aristotle spends much less time on hamartia than he does peripetea or agnonorisis; thus it's "incorrect to speak of hamartia as a doctrine" (Dawe 90).
J.M Bremer, author of the article "Tragic Error in the Poetics of Aristotle and in Greek Tragedy" of the American Journal of Philology, is satisfied with the meaning "error" but thinks its wrong to believe "that there's any notion of fault or moral defect involved in hamartia" (Bremer 711). He suspects "that the meaning of hamartia is one of those problems which become the more insoluble the more fully they're examined" (Bremer 711) and adds that the meaning is very skeptical (Bremer 711). The more research done and the more input added on hamartia, the less a finite definition is found, which is partly why Bremer explains hamartia's problem is "insoluble."
Dawe and Bremer agree on the fact that the definition of hamartia can and does differ from reader to reader, thus adding significance to Dawe's comment of it not being comparable to Aristotle's more definite terms of peripetia and agnonorisis.
Further Information
Get more info on 'Hamartia'.
|
External Link Exchanges
Do you know how hard it is to get a link from a large encyclopaedia? Well we're different and will prove it. To get a link from us just add the following HTML to your site on a relevant page:
<a href="http://hamartia.totallyexplained.com">Hamartia Totally Explained</a>
Then simply click through this link from your web page. Our crawlers will verify your link, extract the title of your web page and instantly add a link back to it. If you like you can remove the words Totally Explained and embed the link in article text.
As long as your link remains in place, we'll keep our link to you right here. Please play fair - our crawlers are watching. Your site must be closely related to this one's topic. Any kind of spamming, dubious practises or removing the link will result in your link from us being dropped and, potentially, your whole site being banned. |
