Aristotle has many things to say about style of writings also. In his ‘Rhetoric’ he discusses style in some detail. According to Aristotle the sine qua non of good writing is clarity. He notes that man is the animal that employs a language to communicate. Language is the principal media through which man communicates with each other. For the communication to be effective the language should be clear, and simple. A writer must use appropriate style to put his ideas across to his readers. He is of the view that familiar words and expressions help the readers to grasp the significance of writing. He is also aware of the fact that a writer cannot always stay away from employing unfamiliar words and expressions. It is the figures of speech such as slimily and metaphor and personification that make the writing charming. Employing figures of speech would not discourage people from reading as they make use of metaphors in their ordinary speech. He says it is the combination of familiar and unfamiliar that suits imaginative writings. According to Aristotle compound words suits lyrics and rare and unfamiliar words suits epics. The appropriate language for drama that stands close to everyday speech is metaphorical. He says that the style of prose is different from that of poetry, though both employ metaphors. The charm of poetry is derived from the unfamiliar words and expressions and metaphors. In prose writings one should avoid countless clauses and faulty punctuation marks. They could lead to many confusions and misunderstandings. Aristotle says that words can be arranged in two ways, loosely and periodically. In the case of the former the sentences are made up of connective words. It has no particular form. In the latter case each sentence is complete and it is easy to understand the sentence without any extra effort. It has a definite form. And it has grace and charm.

Aristotle says that the origin of comedy is obscure. Nothing is known about the person or persons who introduced the masques and the various characters either. However, the compositions of the plots originated in Sicily, says Aristotle. Comedy emerged out of Satire which in turn is believed to have originated from the phallic songs. Phallic songs are songs sung during the worship of Dionysus. The Orphic Mysteries tell us a lot about Dionysus. Dionysus was the god of wine and of the sense of liberation from human bondage and of access to divinity that intoxication bestows. Comedy evolved out of Satire in course of time. The major difference between a satire and a comedy is that while the former deals with the personal the latter deals with the general. Satire is a scathing personal attack. Comedy portrays man in his worst aspects. It does not portray man as cruel or wicked. It points to the defective and the ugly aspects of man. The comical actions are not destructive or harmful. Though it does make us laugh our hearts out it does not make fun of or hurt anyone personally. It is that they are ludicrous by nature. Aristotle does not see any malice in the pleasure derived from a comedy as Plato does. According to Plato defects in a person should arouse the feeling of sympathy not laughter in the audience. However, Aristotle points to the fact that the defects that make the audience laugh is not personal but general. What evokes laughter is the follies and weakness of a ‘type’. And hence it does not hurt anyone. Aristophanes’ ‘Wasps’, ‘Clouds’, ‘Frogs’ are the most famous Greek comedies. The function of a comedy is correction of society. However, the impact of a comedy may not last as long as that of a tragedy.

Epic is older than tragedy. Epic evolved out of hymns to Gods and songs sung in praise of heroes. It has many things in common with tragedy. Tragedy came out of epic. Aristotle says that an epic is an imitation of action that is serious, whole and complete. Aristotle has said that one who knows tragedy also knows epic. Unlike tragedy an epic is meant to be read. An epic has plot, character, thought and diction. The plot may be simple or complex, just as the plot of a tragedy. The objective of an epic also is to produce catharsis in the readers by arousing the feelings of pity and fear in their minds. Though Aristotle does not say so explicitly, the plot is the most important constituent of an epic. However, an epic involves narration not dramatic action. It must have a beginning, a middle part, and an end. However, the parts are not to be organized as in the case of historical writings. In the case of historical writings the focus is not on a single action but a particular period of time. The historian refers to all the important persons and events in the period .The relations between the persons and events or between the persons may not be very clear. In an epic the poet focuses his attention on a particular action. According to Aristotle Homer is the best epic poet as he did not include everything that happened during the Trojan War. An epic can be long or short as there is no limit to narration. The poet has the freedom to move from place to place as he likes.
The poet may stay back and let the characters to speak. As the poet does not have to convince the audience in theatre as in the case of tragedy, he can indulge in his imagination and narrate things as he thinks. Aristotle also says that the heroic hexameter is the appropriate meter for the epic as it has the greatest stability. It helps the poet to employ various metaphors in his narration. The trochaic and iambic tetra meter is appropriate for dancing. Only the literate can read and enjoy epics. Anyone even if the person is illiterate, can watch and enjoy a tragedy. However, those who can read will be able to watch a tragedy and enjoy it. Aristotle believes that a tragedy can produce more pleasure than an epic can. And hence tragedy is the best form of poetry.

According to Aristotle, poetry is imitation or imaginative reconstruction of life. As he sees it tragedy is the “greatest form of poetry”. The Plot is the most important part of a tragedy. Plot may be defined as the logical combination of the actions. It expresses the casual relationships among the incidents. According to Aristotle, the plot must have ‘unity of actions’. It must have a beginning, a middle part and an end that cannot be interchanged. The playwright is to present the actions of the hero alone. He must be careful enough not to present the actions of other characters in the play. All actions of the hero need not be presented. Only those actions that have something to do with the tragedy that befalls the hero need be presented. These actions must be intimately connected with each other and must create an organic whole. It seems that Aristotle does not attach much importance to the ‘unity of time’ and the ‘unity of place’. He insisted that the plot must arouse the feelings of pity and fear in the spectators. The undeserved sufferings of the hero arouse the feelings of pity. And the fears of the worst that may happen to the hero arouse the feeling of fear. The ending of the tragedy must be sad. Only sad endings can create a sense of tragedy. The feelings can be aroused by way of theatrical effects such as physical torture, piteous lamentations and beggarly appearance. The two parts of the plot namely, complication and dénouement must be convincing. Aristotle speaks about two kinds of plots. Simple and complex. In a simple plot, there is no complication or confusion. The change of fortune comes about without a reversal or recognition. In a complex plot, the change of fortune comes about with recognition or reversal or both. The reversal in the play is referred to as ‘Peripetia’. It involves mistaking a friend for a foe and killing him, and a change of fortune from good to bad. Recognition is referred to as ‘Anagnorisis’. It involves the discovery of the nature of past actions and a change from ignorance to knowledge. Both of them have an element of surprise in them and are capable of moving the spectators.

Aristotle the famous disciple of Plato was not a literary critic in the modern sense of the term. However, in his book ‘Poetics’, Aristotle discusses the nature of poetry. Drawing upon the Greek literature, he puts forward cogent arguments about the nature of poetry. His approach is scientific and materialistic. He agrees with Plato and says that poetry is imitation like any other art. Artists and Poets imitate things. According to Aristotle, imitation is an inborn instinct. But he does not agree with the view of Plato that poetry is twice removed from reality, as it is an imitation of imitation. Accepting the given apparent world as real Aristotle holds that poetry represents life. Having said that, he classifies poetry in terms of their structure into different types such as ballad, epic, tragedy, satire so on. Poetry gives pleasure to the poet and the reader. Not only that, a poem reveals truths of universal kind. Comparing a poet with a historian, he says that a historian merely records what has happened in the past. But a poet is a prophet as well. He can also say what may happen in the future, what is possible according to the law of probability. Aristotle states that it is for the pleasure poetry offers and its ability to satisfy the basic instinct in man for rhythm, poetry is written and read. Unlike Plato, Aristotle does not see instruction as the basic function of poetry. However, if it instructs in addition to providing pleasure or if the instruction is incidental, it is acceptable. Such poetry serves two purposes, i.e., it gives pleasure and it inculcates moral values in the readers. Aristotle agrees with Plato that poetry appeals to emotions. But he does not accept the contention of Plato that poetry is harmful to society. He believes that poetry has a beneficial effect on society. He says that tragedy, the greatest form of poetry as he sees it, arouses the feelings of pity and fear in the minds of readers and spectators and refines their emotions. When one watches the sufferings of others in a tragedy or in other forms of poetry, the emotions of pity and fear in ones mind finds an outlet and one is relieved of the excess of these emotions. One feels lifted out of one self and becomes nobler than before.

Plato rightly says that poetry is the product of imagination not that of rational thinking. Therefore, the life portrayed in poetry is not real. It is just what the poet imagines it to be. Poetry is imitation of life which is an imitation of what he calls ‘Forms’. Therefore, poetry does not help the reader to understand the real. It is the nature of poetry. Everyone accepts this argument of Plato. Having discussed the nature of poetry, Plato goes on to discuss how and why poetry influences the readers. Poetry does not prompt the readers to think rationally. Poetry holds reason prisoner and sets man on a flight of fancy. In other words, poetry appeals to emotions and feelings, not to rational thinking. It gives pleasure not knowledge to the readers. According to Plato poetry often “fed and watered the passions” and “ruled” the readers. These comments show clearly that he was well aware of the poetic method. Plato classified poetry into dithyrambic and mimetic. The dithyrambic poetry is entirely lyrical. Poetry such as drama and epic are mimetic. In drama, the poet imitates the speech and actions of man. However, epic contains lyrics also. According to Plato, an epic is better than a drama. This is widely accepted even today. Plato also discusses the nature of the pleasures the tragedies and comedies arouse in the spectators. Although the explanations are not convincing, it was Plato who raised such questions first. We may not agree with Plato on many points. However is remains a fact that it was Plato who first discussed the nature of what we call literature today.

Function of Poetry
It may be said that Plato did not have a high opinion about poetry or poets. Being a philosopher, he looked at everything from a moral point of view. Therefore, he concluded that poetry took readers away from reality and that poetry does not make man wise and virtuous. He suggests truth as a test of poetry. However, Plato thinks that poetry can play an important role in society. According to Plato, who follows Socrates in these matters, giving pleasure to the reader should not be the main object of poetry or poet. Poetry to be worthwhile must instruct the reader. It must be able to lead the readers to the truth and make them aware of virtue. A poet must also be good teacher. Poetry should mould the character of man and take care of the interest of the state. For Plato pleasure is secondary to instruction. A poet must be able to trace the nature of beauty and perfection and instruct the readers and prompts them to lead a virtuous life. He must be concerned with the ideal forms of justice, goodness, beauty so on. He must write poems in praise of gods and great men and instil a sense of beauty and responsibility in the readers.

Plato’s views on Drama
Like poetry, drama also is a product of imagination so it cannot inculcate any moral values in the spectators. Drama is meant to be staged. Moreover, in order to please the diverse audience the playwright often plays to the gallery and presents quarrels and lamentations in tragedies and the cries of beasts in comedies. Such scenes appeal to the baser instincts in man. He is also aware of the effect of the roles on the mind of the actors. As the actors continuously imitate the actions of criminals, cowards and the like, there is a chance of these bad qualities influencing the actors. They suppress the actual nature of the actors and weaken their character. However if the characters are good they will leave a positive effect on the actors. Therefore, the tragic dramas that portray the noble part of life may be encouraged. Referring to the comic and tragic pleasures Plato says that indulgence in them is harmful to the individual and society. A fool acting as a wise man and a coward acting as a brave man evokes laughter in the audience. It is what the actor is and what he pretends to be that makes people laugh. Plato rightly says that such pleasure is malicious. One should never make fun of a man’s weakness. On the contrary, one should take pity with him. Then one would not laugh. Thus, the nature of tragic and comic pleasure is highly complicated.

Plato is still regarded as one of the greatest thinkers the world has ever seen. He is believed to have been the disciple of the legendary Socrates. He was not a literary critic in the modern sense of the term. He was a philosopher concerned with truth and reality. In the course of his enquiries into reality, Plato found himself faced with many issues. What was known as “imaginary writings”, mainly poetry was one of them. His observations on the nature of poetry are found in his books such as “Ion”, “Republic” so on. Plato says that poetry is the imitation of life. Life itself is not real but a reflection of what he calls, ‘Form’ or ‘Idea’ of life that exists somewhere else. Therefore, the life represented in poetry is not real .It is twice removed from reality. Plato points to the poet’s own admission that they write poetry when they are inspired. So the views expressed in poetry, says Plato, is not the outcome of rational thinking which alone, as he sees it, can lead us to the understanding of reality. Unlike philosophy which is based on cold reasoning. poetry is the product of sudden and momentary impulse. So it cannot improve the character of the citizens. As it is a product of inspiration rather than that of reflection, poetry appeals to emotion holding reason prisoner. To prove his arguments Plato refers to the weeping and wailings in the poetry of his time. Plato further holds that, poetry is not concerned with morality. It treats virtues and vices alike. Sometimes virtue triumphs at other times vice triumphs. Depicting triumphs of vice in poetry will demoralise the citizens and harm the society. The fall of good men depicted in the epics of Homer, in the verses of Hesiod and the tragedies of Sophocles etc disturbed Plato much. Moreover, the picture of Gods and heroes in their poetry are immoral and hence objectionable. Gods are often unjust, cruel and indulged in immoral and vengeful activities. The heroes are often influenced by the passions of pride, anger and grief. Plato felt that this type of poetry could harm the harmonious life of the people. According to Plato “Poetry fed and watered the passions instead of drying them up. People let them rule instead of ruling them as they ought to be ruled with a view to the happiness and virtues of mankind.”