Considered the precursors of Western dramatic criticism, Aristotle's notes on the Poetics provide modern readers with the language with which tragedy is evaluated and judged. In this essay I will examine how Aristotle's classical view of tragedy flourishes in modern works such as Henrik Ibsen's A Doll House. In particular, I will argue that Ibsen's form of realism uses Aristotle's plot ideal as "that which is capable of happening according to the rule of probability or necessity" to achieve a social or political reaction in which the tension between Nora and her audience allows her to be portrayed. as a tragic character (Aristotle page 127). The focus here is not on Nora and Torvald's story of female exploitation, but rather on how the play's three-act plot structure adds to the fear and pity of dramatic tragedy. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay From the beginning, Ibsen faces a conflict between illustrating a "realistic" story supported by historical, internal, external, and subconscious supporting details between characters and the need to reduce himself to only the details necessary for the plot to convey a strong social message. Without artistic selectivity, the show would have to elaborate on every detail that contributes to Nora's submissive disposition. Nora's father, mother, Mr. Krogstad, Mrs. Linde, and every other character would have equal rights to representation, and Nora would simply become loose connective tissue. Aristotle considers this problem when he states that the beginning of a tragedy “does not necessarily have to follow something else” so that the plot is not distracted and lost in a mass of introductory details. Rather, the work should find a starting point where “after it naturally there is or happens something else” (Aristotle page 127). At the beginning of the play Nora has experienced a long history of submission to Torvald and her father, which Ibsen effectively conveys through a single event, the loan fiasco. Another Aristotelian element evident in A Doll's House is peripeteia, or the "change of what is undertaken in a direction opposite to that previously stated" (Aristotle, page 128). Ibsen describes peripeteia through a series of causes and effects with predictable consequences. For example, Nora's naivety in signing Krogstad's loan in her father's name and Krogstad's insecure job position create a situation where Nora's secret could be revealed. The audience can see the inevitable consequence of Nora's actions, feeling Aristotle's “fear and pity” for her. Each act includes vicissitudes: in the first, Nora and the audience come to understand that Nora's idyllic relationship with Torvald is a farce; of Nora to solve the problem causes it to arise; in the third, that Torvald will not forgive her, putting an end to the dream of the “most wonderful thing” that must necessarily end their relationship. Ibsen realizes these revelations in just three acts using carefully programmed characters and aesthetic selectivity. Nora demonstrates many characteristics of Aristotle's tragic character. While the predicted disaster within Nora's relationship with Torvald can be said to inspire fear in the audience, her inability to stop or prevent the collapse inspires audience pity. She is "neither an example of virtue and justice", nor "is she transformed into an unfortunate person due to real malice or wickedness, but due to some error" (Aristotle page 129). Nora truly believes she has committed no crime, rhetorically asking Mrs. Linde if "it is indiscreet to save your husband's life" for, 2007. 548-71.