Old Tragedy

 Maybe it’s an acquired taste, but I don’t think so. I loved the plays of Aeschylus the first time I read them decades ago. I love Old Tragedy.

If you don’t know what Old Tragedy it, it’s basically — and superficially —two actors and a chorus.

But as H.D.F. Kitto points out, it’s a different concept. Those of us who grew up on Hollywood movies have a sensibility that is closer to the Middle Tragedy of Sophocles and the New Tragedy of Euripides. From the time of Sophocles, we’ve conceived of drama as a conflict or contest between characters. The Greek word for contest is agon. We speak of a protagonist and an antagonist. No conflict, no drama.

Before Sophocles, playwrights had a different view. Tragedy was not a contest between two characters. It was a hero facing his or her destiny. The drama played out within the hero, as he or she reacted to developments, thinking aloud in a conversation with the chorus.

That's Old Tragedy, and a lot of people don’t like it. It’s all talk. Not much happens. The action, what little there is, isn’t all that exciting.

But to some of us, the conflicts within ourselves are every bit as interesting as those we have with others.

Old Tragedy focuses on the fact that human beings make moral choices and sometimes we fail spectacularly. Sometimes, we slowly realize how our own flaws led to disaster. Such stories, to some of us, are irresistible. I shouldn’t want to watch such trainwrecks, but I can’t resist.

• Source: H.D.F. Kitto, Greek Tragedy; Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1954. The chapter on Old Tragedy is on pp. 33-67.