Hi all! As I mentioned in my email, I thought we could have a more detailed discussion of the question that Staci raised in class: can or should we regard “Wit” as a tragedy in the ancient sense of the word, and can we see Vivian as a classically flawed hero(ine)? (Staci, if there’s anything you want to add to this, please post it!)
Think about what we discussed in class as far as the characteristics of an ancient Greek tragedy– we have a 5-act structure with specific times and places for scenes, odes, prologue, and epilogue; ideas of a unity of time, place, and action; a chorus / choragos who mediate for the audience; the “six elements” of drama, according to Aristotle (plot / conflict, character, thought, speech, song and dance, spectacle); a protagonist who is heroic, legendary, or otherwise noble, but for his hamartia (fatal flaw); and an expectation of catharsis for the audience…
Using what you’ve read in the Bedford Glossary and your knowledge of “Oedipus Rex,” I’m sure you can think of other characteristics of the Greek tragedy.
Do we see these carried through into a contemporary drama or tragedy like “Wit”? In what ways is it helpful to think about “tragedy” as it is developed by the ancient Greek playwrights? How do we see “tragedy” changing from “Oedipus” to “Hamlet” to “Wit”?
sorry to be the one to post first and overtake this discussion, considering it was MY question, but i don’t think “Wit” can be considered a tragedy in the ancient sense. it’s more of a tragedy in a modern sense… in the way that tragedy=sad ending. While Vivian kind of does have a fatal flaw (lack of social life, single-minded ambition, unkind and merciless to her stuents), she’s not flawed in the same ancient sense. Also, there is no catastrophic ending where every character dies a bloody death. As we discussed, one theme of the play was that life goes on after death, instead of the ancient tragedy where everyone in the family is taken out and the house has fallen. Also, the character doesn’t live in a corrupt or unjust world (unless you count God allowing her to get cancer?).
So, no, i don’t believe “Wit” is a tragedy in the ancient sense of the word… but more of a modern adaption (written in 1999, right?). I think this relates back to our discussion of literary canons and what makes them such… it evolves over time, discussion, and “them” deciding that a work is a canon. I guess the same can be said about a writing/play style? That over time and on closer inspection plays of this kind will develop into their own genre that will eventually be defined? I dont know… any other thoughts? Sorry again to overtake the discussion! i just find it interesting!
The very definition of “ancient / classical tragedy” prevents us from placing “Wit” in this category– it was, after all, written within the last 20 years! But I think it’s worth noting that even in this contemporary play (as in many others), the playwright still engages with dramatic conventions that date back to the time of Sophocles & co. Your question about whether contemporary drama(s) will eventually be categorized into new subgenres is interesting, and we know that this has occurred within the past century or so– think about the development of musical theater from opera, cabaret, and vaudeville. Or, for example, the existence of realist theater and absurdist theater under the larger rubric of “contemporary theater.”
Now this might be stretching it a little bit, but if I wanted to equate “Wit” to a standard, archaic tragedy, here’s how I’d break it down:
Flawed Hero(ine): You can definitely see both the heroic and tragically flawed aspects of Vivian. She is heroic in her stoicism; she unwaiveringly takes the maximum dosage of chemo radiation in each successive cycle–despite the obvious ramifications (i.e. crippling pain, frailty, and loss of bodily functions). She is also incredibly intelligent (one might say *tragically* so), but her strengths come with a price. Similar to great Achilles’, her proverbial “heel” lies in her lackluster social performance. Her astute, philosophical approach to life tends to alienate her from her peers, leaving her alone, isolated. Thus we see both the heroine and her inherent tragic flaw.
Act Structure: Again, stretching it here. While the story has no specified acts, one could easily go through and subdivide at the delineated scenes, splitting it up quite nicely into five separate “chunks”. However, contrary to typical tragedy, the climax does not occur in medias res, but rather at the very end of the story. This is the respect in which “Wit” least resembles a typical tragedy, in my opinion.
Mediator/Choragos: This one is a touch more subtle. The mediator, or stand-in choragos, is none other than our heroine. Though involved in the action, she essentially translates and summarizes for us through an elaborate series of asides and apostrophes. Though not standard practice, we still see some sort of intermediary between the action and the audience in Vivian.
Aristotle’s Elements: Plot/conflict are obviously present from the get-go. Cancer. We’ve given the antagonist a name, if not necessarily a face. There is a battle to be fought, and right off the bat, we know who the opponents (the characters) are: Vivian versus Cancer. We are introduced to Vivian’s innermost thoughts via her lengthy monologues; thus both speech and thought are intertwined. Regarding song, in the movie version, the musical score underlies and emphasizes the emotions felt by the audience. During the tender scene between E.M. and Vivian on her deathbed, soft piano music tugs at the hearts of the audience. Dance-wise, the flurry of action during Jason’s falsely-called code blue can be interpreted (or even easily staged) as an intricately choreographed dance with Death.
…whew. That was lengthy.
Do I personally believe that “Wit” can be equated to a classic tragedy though? No, I don’t. I agree with Staci. Though it does contain several elements of its archaic predecessor, “Wit” diverges vastly in several areas: namely, in chronology and plot structure. The anachrony involved is not typical of a standard tragedy, which runs more or less straightforward through time.
But that’s just me.
Your description of the final scene as a “dance of death” just reminded me of our discussions of ancient Greek theater. How fitting that explorations of death and salvation are still central to drama, when it actually developed out of religious ceremonies and rituals of Bacchus!
I agree that “Wit” can be stretched to fit the standard elements of an ancient/classical tragedy, but I think this takes away from its contemporary tragic elements. I know that I could be wrong here, but I dont think the author intended for this play to be defined as a classic tragedy at all. The main character is obviously not from noble or powerful backgrounds like Halmet and Oedipus. Rather, she is an ordinary woman with ordinary social problems who is battling an ordinary disease. No murder, incest, or psychological problems. There is no hamartia, Vivian simply succumbs to a deadly disease and is taken by God to the afterlife.
These events make the play what it is. Rather than a catharsis in the strict meaning of the word, the audience feels saddened, relieved, and hopeful. They can relate to the actress and sympathize with her. This idea of a play with a sad ending defines tragedy in the modern sense. There is no need for strict structure or specific elements of drama. I believe “Wit” can be defined as a tragedy, but not in the ancient meaning of the word.
I think you guys are right on. “Wit” can’t be classified with the “ancient tragedies,” partly because it isn’t ancient, and partly because the play has elements of the comic, too. But I think that knowing the characteristics of an ancient tragedy may be helpful to us in thinking about Vivian and her struggle. The idea of the “fatal flaw,” for example, is interesting when applied to Vivian… in the strict definition of the word, “hamartia” is the weakness that brings about the hero’s downfall. Does Vivian have such a weakness? We suggested in class that it might be her isolation, her arrogance, her focus on scholarship, analysis, and the acquisition of knowledge. The question is, does this bring about her downfall????
i actually think it might have brought on her downfall… even though she obviously isn’t at fault for having cancer. BUT it wasn’t detected until stage 4.. meaning that she was stubborn in recognizing there was a problem and seeking help. Her arrogance prevented her from thinking there MIGHT have been something wrong with her, something she didn’t understand. also, if she was surrounded by loved ones they might have urged her to take better care of her health and to go get a check up before it progressed to such a fatal stage. so, while she didn’t physically cause herself to get cancer all of her flawed qualities helped it to progress to the fatal stage it was. if it had been detected earlier it most likely wouldnt have been as fatal and wouldnt of led to her death.
I completely agreee with Staci on this one. Although getting cancer is not Vivian’s fault it isn’t detected until it was too late to do anything. She admits to Jason that she hasn’t seen a doctor very often. She also dismissed all of the early symptoms. I agree as well that if she had close family or friends, they might have caught some of the warning signs. I believe that Vivian also made her treatment more difficult by not asking the doctor questions. She instead tried to work it all out by herself, as she has done since she was a little girl. I believe that she could have saved herself a lot of pain by asking more questions about the treatment that she agreed to so easily. Dr. Kelekian only gave her the one treatment option, the one that he was doing research on. Had she asked questions, there make have been something else that could have been done.
I also agree with what Staci and Christine are saying. I think “Wit” can’t be classified as an ancient tragedy because when we discussed tragedy earlier in class one of the main characteristics was a catastrophic ending. While we do have a death, Vivian, it is not a play where everyone dies. In an ancient tragedy it’s expected that everyone end the play in death.
I also agree that her weakness is what brought her to her downfall. She didn’t want to admit she needed help and was having problems until she could no longer handle it all by herself. She didn’t have any family or friends close enough to her to detect early problems and she didn’t go to the doctors ever. Which is also a sign of weakness because the doctor is associated with sickness, something a hard headed person doesn’t want to deal with.