Poetry vs history

The function of the poet is not to relate what has happened but what may happen — what is possible according to the law of probability or necessity. The historian and the poet do not differ in that one writes in prose and the other in verse; they differ in that the historian relates particular facts, while the poet relates the kinds of things that could happen. This makes poetry more philosophical and more serious than history: history speaks of the particular, poetry of the universal.

Of all plots and actions, the episodic are the worst: plots in which episodes succeed one another without probable or necessary sequence. Bad poets compose such things through their own fault; good poets compose them under the pressure of the actors, who demand long plays and stretch the plot beyond its natural capacity. The best tragic plots are not episodic. They achieve their effect through causal connection — events follow from prior events by necessity or probability — even when the connection is initially hidden and the events therefore produce surprise.

Tragedy should imitate not only a complete action but events inspiring fear and pity. The most powerful tragic effect occurs when events arrive by surprise and yet turn out to be causally connected — the audience's expectation is defeated, but on reflection the result was inevitable. This combination of surprise and causality is superior to the merely accidental coincidence, even when the coincidence seems strange. A statue of Mitys falling on the man who caused Mitys's death seems more than accident: plots should feel like this, whether or not they are based on historical fact.