Dramatic uses
Catharsis is a term in dramatic art that describes the effect of tragedy (or comedy and quite possibly other artistic forms) principally on the audience (although some have speculated on characters in the drama as well). Nowhere does Aristotle explain the meaning of "catharsis" as he is using that term in the definition of tragedy in the Poetics
(1449b21-28). G. F. Else argues that traditional, widely held
interpretations of catharsis as "purification" or "purgation" have no
basis in the text of the Poetics, but are derived from the use of catharsis in other Aristotelian and non-Aristotelian contexts.
For this reason, a number of diverse interpretations of the meaning of
this term have arisen. The term is often discussed along with
Aristotle's concept of anagnorisis.
D. W. Lucas, in an authoritative edition of the Poetics,
comprehensively covers the various nuances inherent in the meaning of
the term in an Appendix devoted to "Pity, Fear, and Katharsis".
Lucas recognizes the possibility of catharsis bearing some aspect of
the meaning of "purification, purgation, and 'intellectual
clarification'" although his discussion of these terms is not always, or
perhaps often, in the precise form with which other influential
scholars have treated them. Lucas himself does not accept any one of
these interpretations as his own but adopts a rather different one based
on "the Greek doctrine of Humours" which has not received wide
subsequent acceptance. Purgation and purification, used in previous
centuries, as the common interpretations of catharsis are still in wide
use today.
More recently, in the twentieth century, the interpretation of
catharsis as "intellectual clarification" has arisen as a rival to the
older views in describing the effect of catharsis on members of the
audience.
Purgation and purification
In his works prior to the Poetics, Aristotle had used the term catharsis purely in its literal medical sense (usually referring to the evacuation of the katamenia—the menstrual fluid or other reproductive material). The Poetics, however, employs catharsis as a medical metaphor.
F. L. Lucas opposes, therefore, the use of words like purification and cleansing to translate catharsis; he proposes that it should rather be rendered as purgation. "It is the human soul that is purged of its excessive passions." Gerald F. Else made the following argument against the "purgation" theory:
It presupposes that we come to the tragic drama (unconsciously, if you will) as patients to be cured, relieved, restored to psychic health. But there is not a word to support this in the "Poetics", not a hint that the end of drama is to cure or alleviate pathological states. On the contrary it is evident in every line of the work that Aristotle is presupposing "normal" auditors, normal states of mind and feeling, normal emotional and aesthetic experience.
Lessing (1729–1781) sidesteps the medical attribution. He interprets catharsis as a purification (German: Reinigung),
an experience that brings pity and fear into their proper balance: "In
real life", he explained, "men are sometimes too much addicted to pity
or fear, sometimes too little; tragedy brings them back to a virtuous
and happy mean."
Tragedy is then a corrective; through watching tragedy, the audience learns how to feel these emotions at proper levels.
Intellectual clarification
In
the twentieth century a paradigm shift took place in the interpretation
of catharsis with a number of scholars contributing to the argument in
support of the intellectual clarification concept.
The clarification theory of catharsis would be fully consistent, as
other interpretations are not, with Aristotle's argument in chapter 4 of
the Poetics (1448b4-17) that the essential pleasure of mimesis is the intellectual pleasure of "learning and inference".
It is generally understood that Aristotle's theory of mimesis and catharsis are responses to Plato's
negative view of artistic mimesis on an audience. Plato argued that the
most common forms of artistic mimesis were designed to evoke from an
audience powerful emotions such as pity, fear, and ridicule which
override the rational control that defines the highest level of our
humanity and lead us to wallow unacceptably in the overindulgence of
emotion and passion. Aristotle's concept of catharsis, in all of the
major senses attributed to it, contradicts Plato's view by providing a
mechanism that generates the rational control of irrational emotions.
All of the commonly held interpretations of catharsis, purgation,
purification, and clarification are considered by most scholars to
represent a homeopathic process in which pity and fear accomplish the
catharsis of emotions like themselves. For an alternate view of
catharsis as an allopathic process in which pity and fear produce a catharsis of emotions unlike pity and fear, see E. Belfiore, Tragic Pleasures: Aristotle on Plot and Emotion. Princeton, 1992, 260 ff.
Literary analysis of catharsis
The following analysis by E. R. Dodds, directed at the character of Oedipus in the paradigmatic Aristotelian tragedy, Oedipus Rex,
incorporates all three of the aforementioned interpretations of
catharsis: purgation, purification, intellectual clarification:
...what fascinates us is the spectacle of a man freely choosing, from the highest motives a series of actions which lead to his own ruin. Oedipus might have left the plague to take its course; but pity for the sufferings of his people compelled him to consult Delphi. When Apollo's word came back, he might still have left the murder of Laius uninvestigated; but piety and justice required him to act. He need not have forced the truth from the reluctant Theban herdsman; but because he cannot rest content with a lie, he must tear away the last veil from the illusion in which he has lived so long. Teiresias, Jocasta, the herdsman, each in turn tries to stop him, but in vain; he must read the last riddle, the riddle of his own life. The immediate cause of Oedipus' ruin is not "fate or "the gods"—no oracle said that he must discover the truth—and still less does it lie in his own weakness; what causes his ruin is his own strength and courage, his loyalty to Thebes, and his loyalty to the truth.
Attempts to subvert catharsis
There have been, for political or aesthetic reasons, deliberate attempts made to subvert the effect of catharsis in theatre.
For example, Bertolt Brecht viewed catharsis as a pap (pabulum) for the bourgeois
theatre audience, and designed dramas which left significant emotions
unresolved, intending to force social action upon the audience. Brecht
then identified the concept of catharsis with the notion of
identification of the spectator, meaning a complete adhesion of the
viewer to the dramatic actions and characters. Brecht reasoned that the
absence of a cathartic resolution would require the audience to take
political action in the real world, in order to fill the emotional gap
they had experienced vicariously. This technique can be seen as early as
his agit-prop play The Measures Taken, and is mostly the source of his invention of an epic theatre, based on a distancing effect (Verfremdungseffekt) between the viewer and the representation or portrayal of characters.
"Catharsis" before tragedy
Catharsis before the 6th century BCE rise of tragedy is, for the Western World, essentially a historical footnote to the Aristotelian conception. The practice of purification had not yet appeared in Homer, as later Greek commentators noted: the Aithiopis, an epic set in the Trojan War cycle, narrates the purification of Achilles after his murder of Thersites. Catharsis describes the result of measures taken to cleanse away blood-guilt—"blood is purified through blood", a process in the development of Hellenistic culture in which the oracle of Delphi took a prominent role. The classic example—Orestes—belongs to tragedy, but the procedure given by Aeschylus
is ancient: the blood of a sacrificed piglet is allowed to wash over
the blood-polluted man, and running water washes away the blood. The identical ritual is represented, Burkert informs us, on a krater found at Canicattini, wherein it is shown being employed to cure the daughters of Proetus from their madness, caused by some ritual transgression. To the question of whether the ritual obtains atonement for the subject, or just healing, Burkert answers: "To raise the question is to see the irrelevance of this distinction".
Therapeutic uses
In psychology, the term was first employed by Sigmund Freud's colleague Josef Breuer (1842–1925), who developed a cathartic method of treatment using hypnosis for persons suffering from intensive hysteria. While under hypnosis, Breuer's patients were able to recall traumatic
experiences, and through the process of expressing the original
emotions that had been repressed and forgotten, they were relieved of
their hysteric symptoms. Catharsis was also central to Freud's concept
of psychoanalysis, but he replaced hypnosis with free association.
The term catharsis has also been adopted by modern psychotherapy, particularly Freudian psychoanalysis, to describe the act of expressing, or more accurately, experiencing
the deep emotions often associated with events in the individual's past
which had originally been repressed or ignored, and had never been
adequately addressed or experienced.
There has been much debate about the use of catharsis in the
reduction of anger. Some scholars believe that "blowing off steam" may
reduce physiological stress in the short term, but this reduction may
act as a reward mechanism, reinforcing the behavior and promoting future
outbursts. However, other studies have suggested that using violent media may decrease hostility under periods of stress. Legal scholars have linked "catharsis" to "closure"
(an individual's desire for a firm answer to a question and an aversion
toward ambiguity) and "satisfaction" which can be applied to affective
strategies as diverse as retribution, on one hand, and forgiveness on
the other.
There's no "one size fits all" definition of "catharsis", therefore
this does not allow a clear definition of its use in therapeutic terms.
Social catharsis
Emotional
situations can elicit physiological, behavioral, cognitive, expressive,
and subjective changes in individuals. Affected individuals often use
social sharing as a cathartic release of emotions. Bernard Rimé studies
the patterns of social sharing after emotional experiences. His works
suggest that individuals seek social outlets in an attempt to modify the
situation and restore personal homeostatic balance.
Rimé found that 80–95% of emotional episodes are shared. The
affected individuals talk about the emotional experience recurrently to
people around them throughout the following hours, days, or weeks. These
results indicate that this response is irrespective of emotional
valence, gender, education, and culture. His studies also found that
social sharing of emotion increases as the intensity of the emotion
increases.
Stages
Émile Durkheim proposed emotional stages of social sharing:
- Directly after emotional effects, the emotions are shared. Through sharing, there is a reciprocal stimulation of emotions and emotional communion.
- This leads to social effects like social integration and strengthening of beliefs.
- Finally, individuals experience a renewed trust in life, strength, and self-confidence.
Motives
Affect scientists have found differences in motives for social sharing of positive and negative emotions.
(1) Positive emotion
A study by Langston
found that individuals share positive events to capitalize on the
positive emotions they elicit. Reminiscing the positive experience
augments positive affects like temporary mood and longer-term
well-being. A study by Gable et al.
confirmed Langston's "capitalization" theory by demonstrating that
relationship quality is enhanced when partners are responsive to
positive recollections. The responsiveness increased levels of intimacy
and satisfaction within the relationship. In general, the motives behind
social sharing of positive events are to recall the positive emotions,
inform others, and gain attention from others. All three motives are
representatives of capitalization.
(2) Negative emotion
Rimé studies suggest that the motives behind social sharing of
negative emotions are to vent, understand, bond, and gain social
support. Negatively affected individuals often seek life meaning and
emotional support to combat feelings of loneliness after a tragic event.
The grapevine effect
If
emotions are shared socially and elicits emotion in the listener then
the listener will likely share what they heard with other people. Rimé
calls this process "secondary social sharing". If this repeats, it is
then called "tertiary social sharing".
Collective catharsis
Collective
emotional events share similar responses. When communities are affected
by an emotional event, members repetitively share emotional
experiences. After the 2001 New York and the 2004 Madrid terrorist
attacks, more than 80% of respondents shared their emotional experience
with others.
According to Rimé, every sharing round elicits emotional reactivation
in the sender and the receiver. This then reactivates the need to share
in both. Social sharing throughout the community leads to high amounts
of emotional recollection and "emotional overheating".
Pennebaker and Harber defined three stages of collective responses to emotional events.
In the first stage, a state of "emergency" takes place in the
first month after the emotional event. In this stage, there is an
abundance of thoughts, talks, media coverage, and social integration
based on the event.
In the second stage, the "plateau" occurs in the second month.
Abundant thoughts remain, but the amount of talks, media coverage, and
social integration decreases.
In the third stage, the "extinction" occurs after the second month. There is a return to normalcy.
Effect on emotional recovery
This
cathartic release of emotions is often believed to be therapeutic for
affected individuals. Many therapeutic mechanisms have been seen to aid
in emotional recovery. One example is "interpersonal emotion
regulation", in which listeners help to modify the affected individual's
affective state by using certain strategies. Expressive writing is another common mechanism for catharsis. Joanne Frattaroli published a meta-analysis suggesting that written disclosure of information, thoughts, and feelings enhances mental health.
However, other studies question the benefits of social catharsis. Finkenauer and colleagues
found that non-shared memories were no more emotionally triggering than
shared ones. Other studies have also failed to prove that social
catharsis leads to any degree of emotional recovery. Zech and Rimé
asked participants to recall and share a negative experience with an
experimenter. When compared with the control group that only discussed
unemotional topics, there was no correlation between emotional sharing
and emotional recovery.
Some studies even found adverse effects of social catharsis. Contrary to the Frattaroli study, Sbarra and colleagues
found expressive writing to greatly impede emotional recovery following
a marital separation. Similar findings have been published regarding
trauma recovery. A group intervention technique is often used on
disaster victims to prevent trauma-related disorders. However,
meta-analysis showed negative effects of this cathartic "therapy".
