Ch.

Raymond Williams says that in modern tragedy evil is considered a deeply complacent idea. Complacent means to be too satisfied with a situation, so that you do not feel that any change is necessary. When we are complacent, we ignore the pain of other people. Our heart is not moved by looking at the troubles and sins of others or ourselves. We lack generosity, hospitality, care and empathy. We have no burden for the lost. So now evil has become a complacent idea for us and so is modern tragedy. Raymond Williams has already discussed Schopenhauers idea of tragedy who says, The true sense of tragedy is the deeper insight, that it is not the individual sin that the hero atones for, but original sin, i.e. the crime of existence itself. He has secularized notion of tragedy which was an unacknowledged idea but it seems to be dominant now: that it is an action and a suffering rooted in the nature of man (Williams). If tragedy is an action and suffering rooted in the very nature of man than the idea of evil becomes complacent and absolute and in this way it ends the normal action of tragedy. The idea is that since we are born with original sin so we become less considerate of our evil deeds. In this way the idea of absolute evil ends the normal action of tragedy. This concept of absolute evil is also applied to tragedy. It is argued that tragedy presents evil as absolute and inescapable force. But this concept is only accepted if we consider tragedy as something about evil and nothing else. If we take the example of Othellos killing Desdimona, it does not mean that his action proves evil as absolute. Instead we should look at this action in the context of the whole tragic action and causes.

Ch.1
Williams reminds that modern emphasis of evil is not actually the Christian emphasis. Christian emphasis generalized the ideas of evil and good. Evil in a general use is the abstract conception of whatever is the reverse of good, especially of the morally good. If good is value realization, evil is value destruction, and patterns such as murder, a value destructive activity is prime illustration of evil. While in modern tragedy evil is something over and above this. Now it seems, no human act is pure evil. Ordinarily the murderer aims at what he thinks is some good, such as revenge. Moreover, what he does, indeed any evil, can be instructive of what evil is. The concept of evil applies to persons, to intentions, to motives, to conduct, and to, institutions, practices, arrangements, situations. Thus, it is evil to torture someone for pleasure because there is certain motive behind it. And an evil person or organization is one who knowingly performs, wills, actions, or remains indifferent to them when performed by another in a situation where one could do something to stop or prevent them. Raymond Williams says that in cultural perspective, evil is a name for many kinds of disorder which corrode or destroy actual lifecommon in tragedy. Williams mention different forms of evil such as, vengeance and ambition, pride or coldness, lust or jealousy and disobedience or rebellion. These are common forms of evil leading to tragedy. These various kinds of disorder cannot be fully explained beyond the realm of ideology and culture. Evil or good can only be generalized in one particular ideology or culture and different ideologies will take these concepts differently. These concepts vary from culture to culture. For example if wine is considered an evil in Pakistani culture and in Islamic ideology than in West it is the part of their culture. Each culture has its own definitions of morality so we cannot tag any person of being absolute model of good or evil.

Ch.1