Introduction: “Tragedy and Contemporary Ideas in Tragic Ideas from Modern Tragedy” by Raymond Williams
“Tragedy and Contemporary Ideas in Tragic Ideas from Modern Tragedy“ by Raymond Williams delves into the evolving nature of tragedy in the modern era. Williams examines how the concept of tragedy has been influenced by the changing social, political, and cultural landscape of the 20th century. He explores the ways in which modern tragedies have challenged traditional notions of tragic heroes, plots, and themes, reflecting the complexities and ambiguities of contemporary life. Williams’ analysis offers a valuable perspective on the enduring power and relevance of tragedy in contemporary literature and thought.
Summary of “Tragedy and Contemporary Ideas in Tragic Ideas from Modern Tragedy” by Raymond Williams
- Rejection of Contemporary Tragedy
Williams argues that there is a prevalent tendency in modern times to reject the possibility of contemporary tragedy. He critiques the idea that tragedy is a phenomenon of the past, often linked to older cultural or social orders. According to him, this belief leads to a rejection of modern expressions of tragedy, often in favor of romanticizing earlier tragic forms.- “In the suffering and confusion of our own century, there has been great pressure to take a body of work from the past and to use it as a way of rejecting the present.”
- Tragedy as Cultural Expression
Tragic experience, according to Williams, is not universal or permanent but deeply tied to the cultural institutions and conventions of the time. The view of tragedy as a fixed, unchanging phenomenon stems from the assumption of a static human nature, which Williams refutes.- “Tragedy is then not a single and permanent kind of fact, but a series of experiences and conventions and institutions.”
- Modern Tragedy and Theoretical Contradiction
Despite a century of modern tragic art, modern tragedy is often dismissed by theorists as impossible. Williams attributes this contradiction to an inability to connect past tragic traditions with contemporary creative expressions, driven largely by an academic bias that favors historical over modern works.- “One of its paradoxical effects is its denial that modern tragedy is possible, after almost a century of important and continuous and insistent tragic art.”
- Order and Accident
Williams challenges the belief that everyday tragedies lack significant meaning because they are not connected to a larger body of facts or order. He critiques the separation of tragedy from “accidents” or “mere suffering,” arguing that such distinctions are ideological and stem from a devaluation of ordinary human experiences in tragic terms.- “The central question that needs to be asked is what kind of general (or universal or permanent) meaning it is which interprets events of the kind referred to as accidents.”
- Destruction of the Hero and Tragic Action
The destruction of the hero is often seen as the defining feature of tragedy, but Williams emphasizes that tragedy is not just about the hero’s demise. Rather, it involves a broader action that affects the larger context—be it society, the state, or life itself. The death of the hero is just one part of the tragic process, not its entirety.- “We think of tragedy as what happens to the hero, but the ordinary tragic action is what happens through the hero.”
- Irreparable Action and Death
Death is often viewed as the final and absolute meaning in tragedy. Williams critiques this perspective, suggesting that the focus on death as an irreparable action reduces tragedy to a static experience, ignoring the broader social and personal implications of life and relationships that continue beyond death.- “To generalise this particular contradiction as an absolute fact of human existence is to fix and finally suppress the relation and tension, so that tragedy becomes not an action but a deadlock.”
- The Emphasis of Evil
Williams critiques modern interpretations of tragedy that focus on evil as a transcendent and inescapable force. He argues that such a view oversimplifies the tragic experience and abstracts it from real, lived experiences of human action and suffering.- “Evil, as it is now widely used, is a deeply complacent idea. For it ends, and is meant to end, any actual experience.”
- The Role of Tragedy in Modern Life
Tragedy, Williams asserts, is not just a reflection of stable beliefs from the past but is deeply intertwined with the tensions of the contemporary world. He contends that true tragic experience arises in times of cultural and social transformation, where old beliefs and institutions are challenged by new realities.- “Important tragedy seems to occur, neither in periods of real stability, nor in periods of open and decisive conflict.”
- Contemporary Tragedy and Human Connection
Williams concludes that contemporary tragedy is about more than individual suffering or existential isolation. It reflects the broader human experience and the ways in which individuals and societies deal with suffering, loss, and disorder. He encourages a re-evaluation of modern tragedy, one that accounts for the dynamic relationships between individuals, communities, and the broader social order.- “The tragic action is about death, but it need not end in death, unless this is enforced by a particular structure of feeling.”
Literary Terms/Concepts in “Tragedy and Contemporary Ideas in Tragic Ideas from Modern Tragedy” by Raymond Williams
| Literary Term/Concept | Explanation | Quotation/Reference |
| Tragic Experience | Tragedy is not a universal, timeless experience, but one that changes according to cultural and historical contexts. | “Tragedy is then not a single and permanent kind of fact, but a series of experiences and conventions and institutions.” |
| Universalism in Tragedy | The belief that tragic themes, such as human suffering, are permanent and unchanging across cultures and time periods. | “The universalist character of most tragic theory is then at the opposite pole from our necessary interest.” |
| Order and Accident | The relationship between significant events (order) and random, meaningless events (accident) in tragedy; Williams critiques the separation of the two. | “We can only distinguish between tragedy and accident if we have some conception of a law or an order to which certain events are accidental and in which certain other events are significant.” |
| Destruction of the Hero | The common tragic interpretation that focuses on the hero’s destruction, often overshadowing the broader societal impact. | “We think of tragedy as what happens to the hero, but the ordinary tragic action is what happens through the hero.” |
| Irreparable Action | The idea that tragedy involves actions that cannot be undone, with death often seen as the ultimate irreparable event. | “Death, then, is absolute, and all our living simply relative.” |
| Cultural Conditioning of Tragedy | The notion that tragic meaning is shaped by the specific cultural and historical circumstances in which it is created. | “The tragic meaning is always both culturally and historically conditioned.” |
| Evil in Tragedy | The concept of transcendent evil as a defining feature of modern tragedy; Williams critiques its generalization and abstraction. | “The appropriation of evil to the theory of tragedy is then especially significant.” |
| Tragic Hero | The central character in a tragedy whose actions and ultimate downfall drive the tragic experience. | “When we confine our attention to the hero, we are unconsciously confining ourselves to one kind of experience.” |
| Tragic Order | The idea that tragedy is related to a larger cosmic or moral order, which either restores or disrupts balance. | “Order, in tragedy, is the result of the action, even where it entirely corresponds, in an abstract way, with a pre-existing conventional belief.” |
Contribution of “Tragedy and Contemporary Ideas in Tragic Ideas from Modern Tragedy” by Raymond Williams to Literary Theory/Theories
- Challenge to Universalism in Tragedy
Williams critiques the traditional view that tragic experiences and meanings are universal and unchanging. He contributes to historicism and cultural materialism by arguing that tragedy is culturally and historically specific, shaped by the conventions and institutions of its time.- “Tragedy is then not a single and permanent kind of fact, but a series of experiences and conventions and institutions.”
- Reevaluation of the Tragic Hero
Williams contributes to the social theory of literature by shifting focus away from the individual hero’s destruction to the broader social and political contexts that surround the tragic action. He advocates for a more collective view of tragedy, where the hero’s downfall is connected to larger societal structures.- “We think of tragedy as what happens to the hero, but the ordinary tragic action is what happens through the hero.”
- Critique of Abstract Concepts like Order and Evil
In structuralism and post-structuralism, Williams critiques how abstract concepts such as “order” and “evil” have been overly simplified and generalized in tragic theory. He argues that these ideas are culturally contingent and must be understood through lived experiences and societal relations.- “Evil, as it is now widely used, is a deeply complacent idea. For it ends, and is meant to end, any actual experience.”
- Tragedy as a Reflection of Social Change
Williams’ theory aligns with Marxist literary criticism by examining how tragedy reflects and responds to the tensions between old and new social orders, particularly in times of social transformation. He suggests that tragedy often arises from the contradictions between received beliefs and emerging experiences.- “Important tragedy seems to occur, neither in periods of real stability, nor in periods of open and decisive conflict.”
- Historical Context in Tragic Theory
In the vein of historicism and new historicism, Williams emphasizes the importance of understanding the historical conditions and social changes that shape tragic forms and meanings. He argues that tragedy cannot be understood in isolation from the social and historical context in which it was produced.- “Its condition is the real tension between old and new: between received beliefs, embodied in institutions and responses, and newly and vividly experienced contradictions and possibilities.”
- Critique of the Separation between Theory and Creative Practice
Williams highlights the disconnect between critical theory and creative practice in the analysis of modern tragedy. He suggests that much of modern tragic theory is rooted in academic frameworks that favor the past and fail to engage with the creative realities of contemporary tragedy, contributing to literary criticism’s call for bridging the gap between theory and art.- “There is the separation of both ethical content and human agency from a whole class of ordinary suffering.”
Examples of Critiques Through “Tragedy and Contemporary Ideas in Tragic Ideas from Modern Tragedy” by Raymond Williams
| Literary Work | Critique Based on Williams’ Ideas | Key Concept from Williams’ Theory |
| Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex | Williams would critique the focus on fate and divine order, arguing that the tragedy of Oedipus should be viewed not as inevitable but as reflective of the changing social orders of Ancient Greece. | Order and Accident – the separation of fate and human agency |
| Shakespeare’s Hamlet | Williams might emphasize that the tragedy of Hamlet is not only about Hamlet’s individual downfall but also about the disorder in the state of Denmark, reflecting broader social and political tensions. | Destruction of the Hero – tragedy is what happens through the hero, not just to the hero |
| Arthur Miller’s Death of a Salesman | Through Williams’ lens, this modern tragedy reflects the contradictions of capitalist society, with Willy Loman’s suffering being connected to larger social and economic structures. | Tragedy as Social Critique – modern tragedy reveals tensions between old and new social orders |
| Euripides’ Medea | Williams might argue that Medea’s actions should be understood in the context of gender and power dynamics within a patriarchal society, rather than focusing solely on her personal vengeance. | Cultural Conditioning of Tragedy – tragic meaning is shaped by cultural and social institutions, not just individual actions |
Criticism Against “Tragedy and Contemporary Ideas in Tragic Ideas from Modern Tragedy” by Raymond Williams
- Overemphasis on Social and Historical Context
Critics argue that Williams’ insistence on tragedy being entirely culturally and historically conditioned downplays the universal human experiences that tragic works often explore, such as suffering, fate, and mortality. - Reduction of Tragic Meaning to Sociopolitical Forces
Williams is critiqued for reducing tragic experience to social and political dynamics, neglecting the personal, existential, or metaphysical dimensions that are central to many traditional interpretations of tragedy. - Undermining the Autonomy of Art
Some critics feel that Williams’ focus on the role of social institutions and historical conditions undermines the autonomy of art, suggesting that works of tragedy are primarily determined by external forces rather than by artistic innovation or individual creativity. - Dismissal of Transcendent Themes
Williams’ rejection of transcendent themes like fate or divine order is seen as problematic by those who believe that such themes are essential to the tragic genre, particularly in classical works like those of the Greeks and Shakespeare. - Neglect of Aesthetic and Formal Elements
Williams’ analysis focuses heavily on the social and ideological dimensions of tragedy, leading some critics to argue that he overlooks the formal, stylistic, and aesthetic features of tragic literature that contribute to its power and significance. - Critique of Theoretical Rigidity
Some scholars argue that Williams’ theory can be overly rigid in its application of Marxist and historicist principles, failing to account for the fluid and dynamic nature of tragic experience, which may transcend specific cultural or historical contexts. - Simplification of Modern Tragic Theory
Williams is criticized for oversimplifying modern tragic theory by suggesting that it universally denies the possibility of contemporary tragedy, whereas many modern theorists actually engage deeply with the concept of tragedy in modern contexts.
Representative Quotations from “Tragedy and Contemporary Ideas in Tragic Ideas from Modern Tragedy” by Raymond Williams with Explanation
| Quotation | Explanation |
| “Tragedy is then not a single and permanent kind of fact, but a series of experiences and conventions and institutions.” | Williams emphasizes that tragedy is not universal or timeless; rather, it is shaped by specific cultural and historical contexts. This challenges traditional views that regard tragedy as a fixed genre with permanent meanings. |
| “The universalist character of most tragic theory is then at the opposite pole from our necessary interest.” | This quotation critiques the universalist approach to tragic theory, suggesting that it oversimplifies the varied and culturally specific nature of tragic experience. Williams argues for a more nuanced, context-driven understanding of tragedy. |
| “We can only distinguish between tragedy and accident if we have some conception of a law or an order to which certain events are accidental and in which certain other events are significant.” | Williams critiques the distinction between tragedy and accident, arguing that it depends on ideological views of order and meaning. He suggests that dismissing certain events as accidents (without tragic significance) alienates human experience. |
| “We think of tragedy as what happens to the hero, but the ordinary tragic action is what happens through the hero.” | Williams challenges the conventional focus on the tragic hero’s destruction, emphasizing that tragedy often involves broader societal implications. Tragedy is not just personal but extends through the hero to affect society and the social order. |
| “Important tragedy seems to occur, neither in periods of real stability, nor in periods of open and decisive conflict.” | This quotation identifies the historical conditions that Williams sees as most conducive to tragedy. He argues that tragedy arises in times of cultural tension, particularly during the transformation of social orders, rather than in periods of stability. |
| “Evil, as it is now widely used, is a deeply complacent idea. For it ends, and is meant to end, any actual experience.” | Williams critiques the modern emphasis on transcendent evil, arguing that it simplifies and generalizes tragic experiences, removing the possibility of nuanced responses and reducing complex human actions to simplistic notions of absolute evil. |
| “To generalise this particular contradiction as an absolute fact of human existence is to fix and finally suppress the relation and tension, so that tragedy becomes not an action but a deadlock.” | This quotation reflects Williams’ critique of the reduction of tragedy to existential deadlock. He argues that tragedy should be seen as an ongoing process of action and resolution, not merely as the fixation on inevitable suffering or death. |
| “The relation between the order and the disorder is direct.” | Williams highlights the dynamic relationship between order and disorder in tragedy. Rather than seeing order as pre-existing, he argues that order is created through tragic action, emerging from disorder as the resolution of a particular situation. |
| “What is in question is not the process of connecting an event to a general meaning, but the character and quality of the general meaning itself.” | This quotation critiques the traditional methods of connecting tragic events to universal meanings. Williams suggests that the focus should be on examining the nature of the meaning itself and whether it truly reflects the cultural and social context of the time. |
| “Tragedy commonly dramatises evil, in many particular forms… We move away from actual tragedies, and not towards them, when we abstract and generalise the very specific forces that are so variously dramatised.” | Williams argues against abstracting and generalizing the concept of evil in tragedy. He believes that evil must be understood in its specific cultural and dramatic context, as different tragedies portray different forms of human wrongdoing or moral failure. |
Suggested Readings: “Tragedy and Contemporary Ideas in Tragic Ideas from Modern Tragedy” by Raymond Williams
- Eagleton, Terry. Sweet Violence: The Idea of the Tragic. Blackwell Publishing, 2003.
- Williams, Raymond. Modern Tragedy. Chatto & Windus, 1966.
- Steiner, George. The Death of Tragedy. Yale University Press, 1996.
https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300069167/the-death-of-tragedy - Barker, Howard. Arguments for a Theatre. Manchester University Press, 1989.
- Segal, Charles. Tragedy and Civilization: An Interpretation of Sophocles. Harvard University Press, 1981.
- Kott, Jan. The Eating of the Gods: An Interpretation of Greek Tragedy. Northwestern University Press, 1987.
- Elsom, John. Post-War British Theatre Criticism. Routledge, 2013.