In it, Aristotle offers an account of what he calls "poetry" (a term which in Greek literally means "making" and in this context includes drama - comedy, tragedy, and the satyr play - as well as lyric poetry and epic poetry). They are similar in the fact that they are all imitations but different in the three ways that Aristotle describes: 1. Differences in music rhythm, harmony, meter and melody. 2. Difference of goodness in the characters. 3. Difference in how the narrative is presented: telling a story or acting it out. In examining its "first principles," Aristotle finds two: 1) imitation and 2) genres and other concepts by which that of truth is applied/revealed in the poesis. His analysis of tragedy constitutes the core of the discussion. Although Aristotle's Poetics is universally acknowledged in the Western critical tradition, "almost every detail about his seminal work has aroused divergent opinions."

This book explores the ramifications of understanding the similarities and differences between the tragedies of Euripides and Sophocles and realistic Japanese noh. First, it looks at the relationship of Aristotle's definition of tragedy to the tragedies he favored. Next, his definition is applied to realistic noh, in order to show how they do and do not conform to his definition. In the third and fourth chapters, the focus moves to those junctures in the dramas that Aristotle considered crucial to a complex plot - recognitions and sudden reversals -, and shows how they are presented in performance. Chapter 3 examines the climactic moments of realistic noh and demonstrates that it is at precisely these moments that a third actor becomes involved in the dialogue or that an actor in various ways steps out of character. Chapter 4 explores how plays by Euripides and Sophocles deal with critical turns in the plot, as Aristotle defined it. It is not by an actor stepping out of character, but by the playwright's involvement of the third actor in the dialogue. The argument of this book reveals a similar symbiosis between plot and performance in both dramatic forms. By looking at noh through the lens of Aristotle and two Greek tragedies that he favored, the book uncovers first an Aristotelian plot structure in realistic noh and the relationship between the crucial points in the plot and its performance; and on the Greek side, looking at the tragedies through the lens of noh suggests a hitherto unnoticed relationship between the structure of the tragedies and their performance, that is, the involvement of the third actor at the climactic moments of the plot. This observation helps to account for Aristotle's view that tragedy be limited to three actors.

Aristotle and the Arc of Tragedy is the latest of Leon Golden’s books to connect Ancient Greece to modern culture. In a world facing many pressing issues Classics professor Golden wants to champion the values and achievements of Classical Civilization. He asserts that Homeric Epic and Greek Tragedy are as relevant today as they were millennia ago because they are riveting and insightful studies of the human condition. Their universality grants them a contemporary relevance despite the passage of time and changes in custom and taste. In one of his previous books, Understanding the Iliad, Golden illuminated the relevance of The Iliad for modern readers. The Bryn Mawr Classical Review praised Understanding the Iliad because it, “achieves what it sets out to accomplish: to provide an interpretation of the Iliad that emphasizes its didactic aspects, its ability to improve its readers by presenting the spectacle of the evolution of a flawed warrior consumed by destructive anger to a legitimate hero who transcends his narcissism and grandiosity and reaches out to others and by doing so heals his own aching soul in the process.” Golden, making use of correspondence and personal contact with Joseph Heller, himself, argues convincingly in Achilles and Yossarian that Homer’s The Iliad exerted a profound influence over Heller as he wrote his modern classic, Catch-22. A Kirkus review acclaims Achilles and Yossarian in these words: “Golden combines impressive erudition with a sharp critical eye and a lucid prose style that laymen will find accessible and engaging. The result is an original and persuasive work of literary scholarship that finds much more than mere war stories in these classics.”

Scholars have often focused on understanding Aristotle's poetic theory, and particularly the concept of catharsis in the Poetics, as a response to Plato's critique of pity in the Republic. However, this book shows that, while Greek thinkers all acknowledge pity and some form of fear as responses to tragedy, each assumes for the two emotions a different purpose, mode of presentation and, to a degree, understanding. This book reassesses expressions of the emotions within different tragedies and explores emotional responses to and discussions of the tragedies by contemporary philosophers, providing insights into the ethical and social implications of the emotions.

We might think we are through with the past, but the past isn't through with us. Tragedy permits us to come face to face with the things we don't want to know about ourselves, but which still make us who we are. It articulates the conflicts and contradictions that we need to address in order to better understand the world we live in. A work honed from a decade's teaching at the New School, where 'Critchley on Tragedy' is one of the most popular courses, Tragedy, the Greeks and Us is a compelling examination of the history of tragedy. Simon Critchley demolishes our common misconceptions about the poets, dramatists and philosophers of Ancient Greece - then presents these writers to us in an unfamiliar and original light.

According to Aristotle the main purpose of tragedy is the manipulation of emotions, and yet there are relatively few accessible studies of the precise dynamics of emotion in the Athenian theatre. In Greek Tragedy and the Emotions, first published in 1993, W.B. Stanford reviews the evidence for ‘emotionalism’ – as the great Attic playwrights presented it, as the actors and choruses expressed it, and as their audiences reacted to it. Sociological aspects of the issue are considered, and the whole range of emotions, not just ‘pity and fear’, is discussed. The aural, visual and stylistic methods of inciting emotion are analysed, and Aeschylus’ Oresteia is examined exclusively in terms of the emotions that it exploits. Finally, Stanford’s conclusions are contrasted with the accepted theories of tragic ‘catharsis’. Greek terms are transliterated and all quotations are in translation, so Greek Tragedy and the Emotions will appeal particularly to those unfamiliar with Classical Greek.