|
|
Post by shannonfender on Nov 20, 2013 7:27:17 GMT
Tragedy is hard to define because it covers a wide range of experiences. Generally speaking, something can be defined as tragic when a person experiences temporary (or sometimes permanent) hopelessness. When something is so profoundly sad that it extends into the question of our morals, desires, existence, or meaning to life, that something has had a tragic impact on your life. That's why death is so often affiliated with tragedy- we put so much of our meaning into those we love. When those people die, the heaviness and grief of loss makes a person feel as if they have lost a part of themselves. Thus, everything that was once accepted is put to question.
Say you don't know the person who has died. We often label natural disasters as tragic, even though the hardship felt by those people has little to no direct effect on us. The same goes for the extinction of certain species. I cannot perfectly conceptualize why I feel that the obliteration of another species is tragic, but I guess it has something to do with the human condition:we see sadness in things that are a reflection upon ourselves. We can imagine and feel the suffering of families affected by a disastrous tsunami, and we understand the profound sadness (and perhaps the guilt) of a lost species because it reflects upon our own fears of being lost in the grand spectrum of things. Things that are tragic alter our lives in some way and force us to take an introspective look into ourselves and a look at our world.
|
|
|
|
Post by samwerner on Nov 20, 2013 7:35:12 GMT
Before defining tragedy and the elevating extras that make a bad event or experience into a tragic one, it is first important to define what a bad thing is so as to be able to differentiate between the two. Certainly, there is no concrete description of what a bad thing is, but I think everyone can agree that bad things are necessary for growth. They may entail small hiccups in the road to success; both individual harm and personal losses may amalgamate into a "bad" thing. Where I draw the line between bad and tragic is when the "thing" becomes void of any personal gain. Bad things happen all the time, but, in a similar way to Siddhartha's journey, they can be viewed as samsara, something equally as important as the "good things" in total well-being. Tragedies are both less expected and predictable, and do not play a crucial part in the overall success of an individual. They are utterly reductive from the well-being of anyone experiencing them (elevating factor). Reading other posts on the forum, it seems as if many consider tragedy to be synonymous with death. Although death often is part of a tragedy, I agree with Yong that there are other ways for tragedy to be seen in life. Similarly to Gatsby, the main character in Metamorphosis (whose name I forget, my bad) lives a life void of critical thought, motivated only by food, money, and familial ties--strikingly animalistic (the money could be substituted for stature in the animal kingdom). I would argue that his life is as tragic as Jay Gatsby's because he spends his days toiling away without a clear motive in life.
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisb on Nov 20, 2013 8:02:16 GMT
The distinction between sad and tragic forms upon not only what we see, but what we wish to see.
Specifically, we can establish (my definition of) the difference between the two degrees of crappiness by considering the concept of a world vision. If we could create the world, how would it look? Although this may seem like a simple concept, there are two different brands of the world vision. On one end, there is perfection beyond what is physically possible. In this world, no one would ever have to die. Failure would be unheard of. Perfection would be normality. On the other end, there is the second brand: the realistic vision. Death and failure are very real, but they would not occur at a frequency beyond what is necessary. The world is good, but perfection is reasonably out of reach. This realistic world vision is what I’ll be carrying forward in the discussion of tragedy.
To get to the point, sadness fits under the realistic world vision while tragedy exceeds that threshold of crappiness. A few examples should clarify this distinction. An 85-year-old passes away. This is sad, but it is not a tragedy. After all, death from old age is to be expected, even in my world vision. Similarly, let’s say I got a 42 percent on the math test I took today. I wouldn’t be happy about that outcome, but it’s not a tragedy. Failure is to be expected in a realistic world vision.
To understand my definition of tragedy, let’s jump back to the topic of death. Instead of an 85-year-old passing away, this time it’s a 20-year-old. In both cases, the death toll is one. Yet the death of a 20-year-old is something nobody plans for in a realistic world vision. The same goes for everything from natural disasters to epidemics. Although we allow for some sadness in our visions of the world, the aforementioned occurrences have no place in what is envisioned. That is where they enter the realm of tragedy.
|
|
|
|
Post by robertxu on Nov 20, 2013 8:26:02 GMT
Up and coming rapper, Gabe Day (yes the son of Daniel Day-Lewis) raps in his newest song, "Judging someone for their dad is just as bad as being racist". Being judged for one's Oscar-winning father is mundanely bad. Racism is tragic. The main difference between these two degrees of suffering is that there is hope or a way out in a mundanely bad situation, while a tragedy is a dead end. Gabe Day will probably live to see another day if he occasionally gets called "the rich kid". On the other hand, victims of racism often times feel that their situations are helpless and thus completely out of their control. The differences between a poor situation and a tragic one can be seen in "The Metamorphosis". Gregor's situation before his transformation is not completely devoid of hope. Gregor could have simply quit his job and pursued his interests instead of choosing to support his ungrateful, and quite frankly, lazy family. We agreed in class that his lack of self-respect and ambition made us dislike him more as a character. "The Metamorphosis" quickly shifts to a tragedy when Gregor transforms into a giant insect. This is largely because Gregor no longer has the ability to better his situation. The idea that tragedies are defined by the lack of control that individuals have over a situation can also be seen in examples that have been mentioned earlier such as "The Great Gatsby" and "Romeo and Juliet". Both are tragic because despite the best efforts and pure intentions of individuals, they are not able to overcome large over-arching forces like their families or popular culture and be with their lovers.
|
|
|
|
Post by keelycorrigan on Nov 20, 2013 16:26:02 GMT
Tragedy is that illusive, morphing concept that—while its manifestation in our culture evolves with whatever ill is in vogue—holds a consistent foundation of pain. Tragedy is fed with pain. Whether that is the emotional pain of a witness or the physical pain of a victim, the root of every tragedy is the kind of scarring, unforgettable pain that burrows itself into the conscious and leeches on to whatever structure it can. Whether this tragedy is that of Romeo and Juliet’s suicides or of the Newtown Massacre, the kinds of events/stories that we collectively label as tragedies are labeled as such because of the pain caused to those affected by it. Betsy previously stipulated that the root of tragedy is death, but I disagree. Many, many people die without it being a tragedy because they did not leave a wake of pain and misery like other events. For example, when Betty White dies, while our country will be in mourning, it will not be considered a tragedy. When JFK was assassinated, however, it was a tragedy because of the pain to the country that it caused. His death shook up an already volatile society and scarred the national psyche. And while I love Betty White just as much as the next one, I think we can all agree that her death, because of her long and fulfilled life, will not be a tragedy.
On a different note, I think that Haley brought up an interesting point when she discussed the word’s presence in our colloquial language. Haley theorized that we are hesitant to use the word tragedy, but I would like to disagree. I think that we as a society and in our media are overusing the term. Some very unfortunate events have been described as tragedies, despite their lack of qualifications for the hefty label. We have also inappropriately appropriated the word into our slang, using it in sarcasm to describe trivial events. I am guilty of this. But, I wish I wasn’t because it degrades the term and undermines the pain of real tragedies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Anna M. on Nov 20, 2013 16:41:12 GMT
I don't think that death is a requirement for Tragedy. Tragedy occurs when something beloved is lost. "Something" could be life, glory, or love. I dance with the idea that a tragedy must involve death. In "Oedipus", I don't think Sophocles' uses the Queen's suicide to make the story tragic, but the fall of a once glorious king to shame. The most tragic event in Oedipus is the moment that King Oedipus realizes he has been living a life that opposes his esteemed morals. Another great tragedy of this play is the irony. Oedipus spent his life avoiding the prophecy from his youth, but in the exact action of avoiding his fate he falls victim to it. I also disagree with the idea that death should define tragedy because in Oedipus, death seems to be an escape from the tragedy. Oedipus himself wishes he had died as a baby instead of live through the tragedy of his fate.
|
|
|
|
Post by danyhong55 on Nov 20, 2013 20:42:06 GMT
I am hesitation to answer this question because tragedy is an emotionally determined state of the situation. Unfortunately, emotions are very subjective. The proverb, one man’s trash is another man’s treasure, in appropriate for this situation. A tragedy to some can be a miracle to another. Or even a simple sad fact may be a tragedy to another person. To set arbitrary rules to say “this is tragedy and this is not” is a violation of the human nature. We are all fundamentally different from each other. Such as Dexter’s dad’s death from the popular TV show, “Dexter,” did not phase the titular character. Whereas a trivial milk spilling can set some people over the edge.
I’d say that a tragedy is mostly defined by a point where emotional duress on people greatly hinders their ability to conduct life normally. Or it can be categorized as one where their minds are altered to the point that they need help or time to recover from the “tragic” event. To describe what makes a tragedy a tragedy is a disservice to the word.
|
|
|
|
Post by carolinedorman on Nov 20, 2013 20:48:53 GMT
My immediate response to thinking of something tragic would be the death of a loved one. Are all deaths, however, created equal? When my 96 year-old great grandfather died, the consolation was “oh, he had a great long life”. I understand it is possible to have a great life but is it ever possible to have a long life? Humans naturally grab for anything that makes sense—anything that is within their control to minimize pain. In society, it isn’t deemed a tragedy for a 95 year-old to pass because we have determined that around that age is the typical time for humans to die. The death of a 30, 40, or 50 year-old, however, is utterly tragic. Tragedy arises when events occur that highlight how little of control humans truly have. Natural disasters, terrorism, and famine are all sad because they cause death but they are tragedies because they are a massive reminder that humans do not control.
|
|
shanejohnson
New Member
"Kindness is the only investment that never fails." - Thoreau
Posts: 15 
|
Post by shanejohnson on Dec 2, 2013 0:42:06 GMT
While the severity of an event certainly contributes to whether or not it is designated as a tragedy (i.e. crushed cupcake vs. death), I would posit that the personal impact of the event (the closeness to ourselves) plays significantly in the classification of something as a tragedy. Now this could be a direct impact or an indirect impact.
To clarify my direct/indirect terminology using examples, a direct impact that would classify something as a tragedy could be a highly significant person in one’s life being killed. In this case, the change or impact directly upon one’s own life causes the event to be “elevated” to a tragedy. However, a tragedy could indirectly impact one’s life as well. If an event happens which is terrible enough and the circumstances could be be related to one’s own life, it could be classified as a tragedy. For example, a parent could understand the tragedy of losing a child without having lost a child, simply because one is a parent of a child.
Ultimately our concept of a tragedy is reasonably complex, and the use of literature such as Oedipus can help us understand the role of tragedy in our own lives.
|
|
|
|
Post by rileyhatfield on Dec 2, 2013 5:52:50 GMT
It's very interesting to me that most people write about tragedy having to do with death. I completely agree, but I believe it expands further from just the death of a human body. Tragedy has to do with the death of anything. Whether the death is when a heart stops beating and a person stops breathing, or there is a "death" of a memory, or a "death" of an idea, either way, something good ceases to exist, which is tragedy in its true form. Consider a star football player shattering his femur, and losing all chances of living his dream as an NFL player. His body, although in distress, is not dead. But, his dream of being the next Tim Tebow died when the doctor told him he could no longer play the sport he loves. This is tragic. Consider a teenage girl who gets her heartbroken for the first time. She did not know that heartbreak could hurt so badly, and thought that type of pain only existed in the movies. But for the first time, she realizes the world isn't perfect and that idea died as soon as the boy hurt her. This is tragic.
Tragedy is not just something that has to do with physical death. It's much deeper than that, and goes beyond the corporeal form. It's the death of any idea, dream, thought, memory and good feeling, that is truly tragic.
|
|
|
|
Post by billfeng on Dec 5, 2013 13:25:47 GMT
Tragedy has become a catch-all phrase for anything that carries some distinction of sadness. As many of my cohorts have already noted, real-life tragedy is supposed to be irreversible damage that can never be recuperated. I think the word tragedy is sometimes over-applied by the media for issues that don't necessarily fit these traits. I recently saw a headline that said "The Tragedy of Kim Kardashian's Following"; here, the word is definitely not being used correctly. I think the reason why tragedy can be used as an umbrella term for so many different reactions and emotions (that my classmates have already listed) is because it plays off of a human trait: empathy. We, as humans, naturally try to understand the pain of others who are afflicted by terribly instances of fate. This reason is why the media finds "tragedy" to be such a remarkably profitable buzz-word.
|
|
|
|
Post by anaritter on Dec 19, 2013 0:59:38 GMT
As humans, I think that things are naturally more difficult for us to cope with when we didn't see them coming, and didn't have time to prepare for them. A lot of how we grieve and adjust has to do with time - all those sayings like "time heals all", "better in time" really are true. Naturally, things are more or less difficult depending on how we take them. This might sound callous, but I don't really think the gravity of the event has so much to do with the sadness we feel, it's just the way we view the event and the way we're able to adjust. Like I said, with less time, we're not able to adjust as quickly or as smoothly. So if your grandparent is dying of old age at the age of 94, their death won't be a tragedy because we see it coming. But when a child dies, it's "unnatural"; that is, children aren't meant to die, and their deaths are often more sudden than the deaths of elderly people. The same goes for murders and mortal injuries - we don't see them coming, whereas with sickness, we become more aware of mortality and thus, more open to the idea of death.
|
|
|
|
Post by travistoal on Dec 19, 2013 20:38:25 GMT
In my opinion, the difference between sadness and tragedy is when the average listener can sympathize, but no longer empathize. Everybody can feel the pain of losing a loved one, it is simply a universal experience. Everybody can empathize with somebody going through this, because they know what it feels like. However, when the experience is raised to such a severity that the average person simply cannot understand the feeling, it is a tragedy. When the World Trade Center collapsed on September 11, there was nothing to compare it to in everyday life. Nobody in America could simply pat each other on the back as if they had gone through something that before. Any outside observer could understand the horribleness of the death and destruction, but it still was impossible to actually comprehend the depth of the feelings of loss and insecurity. At the same time, this definition would imply that just because somebody had encountered a terrible experience, then the same experience wouldn't be a tragedy to them because they can actually empathize. Although it isn't accurate that the experience is no longer a tragedy to that observer, it is true that the observer would be able to share the feelings of the sufferer. That doesn't lessen the impact of the event, but being able to share the burden of sadness with someone who actually understands might lighten the load on yourself.
|
|
