Three Unities of Dramatic Composition

 

The three principles of dramatic composition are that a play should consist of one main action, occurring at one time(not longer than the play takes to perform), and in one place; expanded from Aristotle's “Poetics” by 16th-century Italian critics, and by French classical dramatists of the 17^th century. The unities were often modified; e.g., the time limit was extended to twenty-four hours, and the place to one house or town, rather than one room or street.

                         The Oxford Companion to English Literature by Sir Paul Harvey

 The three unities for a drama have been very familiar topics in the critical discussion of dramatic literature. Since the Renaissance, the three unities have been considered necessary to create credibility in a play. The neo-classical age made these three unities into a rigid rule to be observed in playwriting. Aristotle’s famous book the ‘Poetics’, with justice been called an important landmark in the history of literary criticism. here Aristotle mentioned more or less originated the art of criticism and various unities. Though many critics regarded the observance of the three unities as obligatory for dramatists, Aristotle insisted on only one unity  - the unity of action. He mentions the unity of time only in passing. Strangely enough, however, Aristotle did not really put forward any rigid rule regarding. The three unities were emphasized by the English, Italian, and French critics. The English critics of the 16^th century, especially Sir Philip Sydney, regarded the observance of the three unities as obligatory for dramatists, though the later critics put less emphasis on the unities of time and place. As a matter of fact, Aristotle insisted on only one unity- the unity of time, on the unity of action. He mentions the unity of time only in passing and does not at all mention unity of place; it has been deduced from the implications of Aristotle’s exposition in his Poetics.  Let us discuss this unity as put forward in Poetics.

Unity of Action

The unity of action is organic unity, which gives form and meaning of tragedy. It makes the plot concrete and significant. It has a beginning, a middle and an end. They are so united that they form a complete whole. These various events are united in two ways. Firstly, they are the fact that they all move forward toward a common goal. The beginning leads logically and inevitably to the end, without any unnecessary digression   and episode coming in between.

Aristotle rules out plurally of action. According to him, there should be one action or plot, and not two actions. Thus, he is against the introduction of sub-plot. Similarly, he is against one double ending, tragic end for some of the characters and a happy end for the others. Plurality of action and such double ends distract attention and weaken the tragic effect. They defeat the very purpose of tragedy, which is to arouse the emotions of pity and fear. Aristotle thus rules out tragicomedy and the introduction of comic relief.

Aristotle has stressed only the unity of action, but his name is also associated with two other unities – the unity of time and place. Aristotle’s idea of unity of action is closely connected with what he says about the ‘magnitude’ or ‘amplitude’, size or length. The principle of size is important both from the aesthetic and utilitarian points of view. Aesthetically speaking, extremes are considered monstrous and horrible, and from the utilitarian point of view, a thing which is too large or too small is unmanageable and cannot be seen and appreciated as a whole. Moreover, the size of tragedy must be functionally appropriate to its end (objective) – a unity of action. He rules out plurality of action. He has stressed only the unity of action, but his name is also associated with two other unities- the unity of time and the unity of place.

 Unity of time:

 The unity of time demands that action of tragedy should remain confined within twenty-four hours. About time, Aristotle said, “while comparing the magnitude of the epic and tragedy that the epic has no fixed limit of time whereas tragedy endeavors to keep as far as possible within a single circuit of the sun, or something near that”. We may assume that by a single circuit of the sun Aristotle intended twenty-four hours and not twelve.

Regarding the unity of time or place it is not possible to remember how little Aristotle said about time. The question of time is touched on by Aristotle only once. In chapter 5, Poetics, he says, “…. tragedy tries as far as possible to keep within a single revolution of the sun, or only slightly to exceed it, whereas the epic observes no limits in its time of action.” According to some critics, the ‘single revolution of the sun does not mean a solar day to twenty-four hours. Furthermore, Aristotle says, nothing of the twenty-four-hour limitation as being a ‘rule’; it was merely a fairly normal practice, and even Greek practice was more flexible.

Aristotle gave a tentative view on the length of tragedy: Tragedy endeavors as far as possible, to confirm itself to a single revolution of the sun, or slightly to exceed this limit”. Aristotle gave that thought of the time.

 Unity of Place:

Aristotle does not mention the unity of place at all. Hence, it is strange that many people are under the misconception  Aristotle made when comparing epic and tragedy.

In a play, one cannot represent action with a number of parts going on simultaneously; one is limited to the part on the stage and connected with the actors. Whereas in epic poetry, narrative form makes it possible for one to describe a number of simultaneous incidents.

Visually Greek setting did as a rule, presented only one place throughout the action. But, once again, Aristotle didn’t formulate any rigid rule about the unity of place as such. It was French and Italian Renaissance critics who invented the doctrine. Scaliger and Castelvetro began the theory, and Sidney brought it to England. The Neo-classical critics held it to be an inviolable part of dramatic art. But among the neo-classical of England, Dryden brought objections to such rules. Later, Dr.Johnson clearly brought out the absurdities of the concept. It was realized that unities of time and place are irrelevant, because their infringement is found in practice to offer real difficulty to the imagination.

We see that the only dramatic unity stressed by Aristotle was that of action. This has, more or less, been justified by the general shown that the introduction of comic relief need not vitiate the tragic effect of a tragedy.  The Aristotelian principle that unity of action is the higher and controlling law of drama. Thus, unity of action, which Aristotle rightly emphasized, is the higher and controlling law of the drama. Though the three unities are called Aristotelian unities, there is no sanction for such an interpretation in Aristotle, who never connected the unities of time and place with imitation. The unity of time and place, so far as they can claim any artistic importance, is of secondary and purely derivative value. Indeed, the unity of time and the unity of place have been made into rules by critics other than Aristotle. Their interest, however, is now more historical than dramatic.