What is one way Elizabethan tragedy is different from Greek tragedy?

Answer 1

There are many important differences between Greek tragedy and Shakespearean tragedy.

Greek tragedy was performed as part of a religious festival (like a church Christmas play) - so the stories were already known to the audience, and everyone knew what was going to happen next.

Elizabethan theatre was commercial entertainment (people paid for their seats - like in a cinema). The stories were usually new, and an element of suspense was nearly always present.

Greek actors wore elaborate costumes, and parts of the dialogue was sung (parts were even danced). Murders, fights and battles had to take place off-stage (a character would tell the audience what was happening) - as usually happens in opera or a Ballet.

Elizabethan actors wore ordinary clothes (though they might be 'in period' for a historical play). They could scuffle, fight - even 'die' - onstage. (Shakespeare has Tybalt die onstage in Romeo and Juliet, to good effect).

Because Greek drama was semi-offical, Greek playwrights tended to be highly respected public servants. Most Greek plays take a broadly politically conservative stance (though the best plays can be quite subtle in the points they make).

Elizabethan players were seen as anti-establishment (they were called 'masterless men'). Many Elizabethan plays are critical of official government positions - though there was rigorous state censorship to make sure they never went too far.

Answer 2

There are many important differences between Greek tragedy and Shakespearean tragedy.

Greek tragedy was performed as part of a religious festival (like a church christmas play) - so the stories were already known to the audience, and everyone knew what was going to happen next.

Elizabethan theatre was commercial entertainment (people paid for their seats - like in a cinema). The stories were usually new, and an element of suspense was nearly always present.

Greek actors wore elaborate costumes and masks, and parts of the dialogue was sung (parts were even danced). Murders, fights and battles had to take place off-stage (a character would tell the audience what was happening) - as usually happens in Opera or a ballet.

Elizabethan actors wore ordinary clothes (though they might be 'in period' for a historical play). They could scuffle, fight - even 'die' - onstage. (Shakespeare has Tybalt die onstage in Romeo and Juliet, to good effect).

Because Greek drama was semi-offical, Greek playwrights tended to be highly respected public servants. Most Greek plays take a broadly politically conservative stance (though the best plays can be quite subtle in the points they make).

Elizabethan players were seen as anti-establishment (they were called 'masterless men'). Many Elizabethan plays are critical of official government positions - though there was rigorous state censorship to make sure they never went too far. Shakespeare's plays, however, consistently adopt a position supportive of the government (and he was far from a "masterless man", being one of the King's Men).

Another difference is that in Greek tragedies logic over rules emotions (characters try to find out the truth and how things really happened) and in Shakespearean tragedies emotion over rules logic (characters worry about their emotions and what they think is going on rather than finding out the truth).

In Greek tragedy, the chorus is always present on stage as a commentator; in Shakespeare choruses only introduce the scene or the play (see Henry V, Romeo and Juliet, Henry IV Part II, and Pericles for examples)

Greek tragedies usually have one continuous simple plot; Shakespeare's plays have complex plots often involving intertwining subplots (e.g. King Lear)

Answer 3

the lovers tend to die or be torn apart from each other

ex: Romeo and Juliet; Paris and Helena

Basically, the similarities are that the characters start off doing quite well but end up not doing well at all, although in Greek Tragedy they are usually miserable and in Shakespearean they are usually dead. Any other similarities are just the similarities between all forms of drama: actors, audience, script.

Answer 4

All ten of Shakespeare's tragedies are different, although they all have a similar story arc where things start out well and end up in disaster.

1. Titus Andronicus is one of only two "revenge tragedies" Shakespeare wrote, the other being Hamlet. Titus is the most sensationally violent of all of Shakespeare's plays, featuring not only an impressive death toll but also multiple dismemberments, rape, human sacrifice and cannibalism.

2. Romeo and Juliet is one of only two of Shakespeare's tragedies to feature the downfall of a couple as opposed to a single person, the other being Antony and Cleopatra. It is unusual in that blind bad luck plays a significant part in the tragedy. It is also similar to the comedies in other ways (the middle-class nature of the protagonists, for example) and has been called a tragicomedy, which is inaccurate. It does not resemble the tragicomedies of Beaumont and Fletcher, for example. Comitragedy might be a better term.

3. Hamlet is Shakespeare's best-known play, one of his two revenge tragedies. It is unusual among all revenge tragedies in that the hero is always shying away from actually doing the revenge. Big contrast with Titus Andronicus there. Hamlet is also the largest role for any actor in one single play by Shakespeare, and one of the most difficult to play because of his complex and manyfaceted character.

4. King Lear is the only play which Shakespeare wrote which is primarily about being old. In it Lear wants to retire but he makes some bad decisions which leave him destitute and betrayed. The same sort of thing happens to Gloucester in the subplot.

5. Julius Caesar is one of several tragedies drawn from Roman history, notable because the title character dies in the first half of the play, and the tragedy is not about him at all. It is also unusual in that there are no important parts for women. Calpurnia and Portia have small and insignificant parts.

6. Othello is unusual in that there is no comic relief in it at all, which makes it grim watching. It has also been noted that it is basically a domestic tragedy which is not really concerned with the well-being of nations (as Hamlet, Macbeth, King Lear and Julius Caesar are, for example) but is more similar in its scope to Romeo and Juliet. It is also unusual in that it deals with racial issues among others.

7. Macbeth is almost more of a history play than a tragedy, and in fact is more similar to the history play Richard III than any other. (Both have a historical basis, a villainous usurper who gains the throne by murder, a legitimate heir who flies the country, a country which falls to ruin under the usurper who loses his friends and allies, and the triumphant return of the legitimate heir and the defeat and death of the usurper. Basically, apart from the historical basis, it's The Lion King). What makes Macbeth different is that he wasn't always a bad guy, but once he allows himself to do wrong he gets worse and worse and unhappier and unhappier.

8. Coriolanus, the second of Shakespeare's Roman History plays, is unusual in that it has almost no soliloquys for the main character. It, like Macbeth, features a main character who is dominated by a woman, although in this case it is Coriolanus's mother, not his wife.

9. The third Roman History play is Antony and Cleopatra, which, as we noted, is very similar to Romeo and Juliet. However, here the people involved are responsible for the peace of the world, not middle-class kids in a small Italian town. The barrier to their love is not the enmity of their parents but their duties as a Triumvir and as a Queen of Egypt. Christopher Marlowe wrote a play (also a historical tragedy) called Edward II which was about the conflict between a king's love life and his political duties, but there is nothing similar in Shakespeare.

10. The oft-forgotten Timon of Athens is the only tragedy where the disaster which befalls the main character is financial. Timon goes bankrupt. It is also unusual insofar as the main character is 100% responsible for the disaster which befalls him. He was warned and an ounce of common sense would have made him realize what was coming but he turned a blind eye to it. In a way, his situation is a bit like that of Roderigo in Othello except that there is no Iago in this play.

Answer 5

The most significant difference is that Greek plays have a chorus, a group of people who comment on and explain the action. The chorus fulfils the same kind of role as descriptive text in a narrative work. Shakespeare's tragedies (and indeed those of all of his contemporaries) do not have choruses of this type.

Elizabethan and Jacobean tragedies also tend to have more complex plotlines and more developed characters than the Greek.

Answer 6

Greek tragedies have a chorus, an ongoing commentary on the action. Elizabethan tragedy has no such device.

Answer 7

Type your answerC.Elizabethan heroes were not always of noble birth.

here...

Answer 8

drama is a story told by actors and comedies the story ends happily and in tragedies a person struggles to overcome difficulties but fails. That's the difference.

Answer 9

No, Shakespeare had not read Aristotle and had no knowledge of his Poetics. Nor had he read any Greek tragedies. He was only familiar with Roman playwrights like Seneca and Plautus.