As I was reading the two Wikipedia articles, I copied information that seemed significant to me and took notes on it. A good, basic definition of tragedy that I found says, "Tragedy is a form of drama based on human suffering that invokes in its audience an accompanying catharsis or pleasure in the viewing." Another point made by the article was that "tragedy has remained an important site of cultural experimentation, negotiation, struggle, and change." There are many different types of tragedy because it was essentially a movement that spread throughout Europe, so in this article, the different types were explained, some of which had their own definitions. For example, a man named Taxidou "reads epic theater as an incorporation of tragic functions and its treatments of mourning and speculation." Yet another part of the article includes this quote: "Tragedy is, then, an enactment of a deed that is important and complete, and of [a certain] magnitude, by means of language enriched [with ornaments], each used separately in the different parts [of the play]: it is enacted, not [merely] recited, and through pity and fear it effects relief (catharsis) to such [and similar] emotions," (Poetics, VI 1449b 2–3). Nietzsche, a philosopher, apparently talked about Greek tragedy in his book The Birth of Tragedy, and I think this could be a good source if I ever need any specific quotes or examples of the different views on tragedy. One common thing I noticed in every different type was the pairing of tragedy and comedy against each other, almost as rivals.
Aside from the basic definition of tragedy, there were a few smaller things that I thought were important. Sophocles is one author that the article mentions as an "increasingly important...model(s) by the 17th century." Clearly Sophocles is an important guy who knew what he was talking (or writing) about. Another thing that I knew but still found important was the fact that the article mentioned Shakespeare as a famous and successful tragedy writer. The last point I found significant was a bit on Corneille and how he "redifined both comedy and tragedy around the following suppositions: 1. The stage—in both comedy and tragedy—should feature noble characters (this would eliminate many low-characters, typical of the farce, from Corneille's comedies). Noble characters should not be depicted as vile (reprehensible actions are generally due to non-noble characters in Corneille's plays). 2. Tragedy deals with affairs of the state (wars, dynastic marriages); comedy deals with love. For a work to be tragic, it need not have a tragic ending. 3. Although Aristotle says that catharsis (purgation of emotion) should be the goal of tragedy, this is only an ideal. In conformity with the moral codes of the period, plays should not show evil being rewarded or nobility being degraded."
Now on to the Sophocles article; his work is only one of three Greek authors whose work has survived until now. He competed in competitions in which his plays were performed at festivals and he won 24 out of 30 of them. His plays feature more character development than those of the other of the three Greek's whose work as survived. In order to create more development, Sophocles added a third actor to the typical cast of two, "which further reduced the role of the chorus and created greater opportunity for character development and conflict between characters." One bit of the article that I found important is this: "Most of Sophocles' plays show an undercurrent of early fatalism and the beginnings of Socratic logic as a mainstay for the long tradition of Greek tragedy." I just thought this sounded like a nice, clear description of what Sophocles' work is like. I think that keeping this in mind while reading his work can help me analyze his pieces better. Something else to keep in mind is that Sophocles' Theban plays aren't a trilogy as they seem to be and even have inconsistencies.
Aside from the basic definition of tragedy, there were a few smaller things that I thought were important. Sophocles is one author that the article mentions as an "increasingly important...model(s) by the 17th century." Clearly Sophocles is an important guy who knew what he was talking (or writing) about. Another thing that I knew but still found important was the fact that the article mentioned Shakespeare as a famous and successful tragedy writer. The last point I found significant was a bit on Corneille and how he "redifined both comedy and tragedy around the following suppositions: 1. The stage—in both comedy and tragedy—should feature noble characters (this would eliminate many low-characters, typical of the farce, from Corneille's comedies). Noble characters should not be depicted as vile (reprehensible actions are generally due to non-noble characters in Corneille's plays). 2. Tragedy deals with affairs of the state (wars, dynastic marriages); comedy deals with love. For a work to be tragic, it need not have a tragic ending. 3. Although Aristotle says that catharsis (purgation of emotion) should be the goal of tragedy, this is only an ideal. In conformity with the moral codes of the period, plays should not show evil being rewarded or nobility being degraded."
Now on to the Sophocles article; his work is only one of three Greek authors whose work has survived until now. He competed in competitions in which his plays were performed at festivals and he won 24 out of 30 of them. His plays feature more character development than those of the other of the three Greek's whose work as survived. In order to create more development, Sophocles added a third actor to the typical cast of two, "which further reduced the role of the chorus and created greater opportunity for character development and conflict between characters." One bit of the article that I found important is this: "Most of Sophocles' plays show an undercurrent of early fatalism and the beginnings of Socratic logic as a mainstay for the long tradition of Greek tragedy." I just thought this sounded like a nice, clear description of what Sophocles' work is like. I think that keeping this in mind while reading his work can help me analyze his pieces better. Something else to keep in mind is that Sophocles' Theban plays aren't a trilogy as they seem to be and even have inconsistencies.