If you don’t know the meaning of “hamartia,” you’re not alone. But it’s a very important word, for more than one reason, so read on.
Hamartia describes a feature many writers of fiction or drama instill in their most memorable characters. It simply means “tragic flaw.” The deep character defect which cannot be overcome by sincere intention or persistent effort.
Merriam-Webster describes it this way.
Aristotle introduced the term in the Poetics to describe the error of judgment which ultimately brings about the tragic hero’s downfall. As you can imagine, the word is most often found in literary criticism.
However, news writers occasionally employ the word when discussing the unexplainable misfortune or missteps of übercelebrities regarded as immortal gods and goddesses before being felled by their own shortcomings.
Despite being a thespian in high school, I never formally studied drama. So I didn’t encounter the word there.
Likewise, I have written consistently since earning a Journalism degree four decades ago. However, since I have a 37:1 nonfiction to fiction ratio, I did not know this Greek word had found its way into the English lexicon.
I was surprised to discover its English meaning in my usually-familiar word of the day email (from The Free Dictionary).
While I was unfamiliar with its English usage, I already knew the word. I originally met hamartia (ἁμαρτία) while studying the New Testament in Greek. Hamartia literally refers to “missing the mark,” and it is the primary biblical Greek word for sin.
The first usage of the word in the sense of being an inner quality, occurs in Aristotle’s Poetics. Aristotle writing as a pre-Christian philosopher, naturally perceived the literary device in a pagan manner.
The Greek word hamartia translates pretty directly as “error” or “shortcoming” without any necessary overtones of guilt or moral failure. Our modern conception of tragedy and the “tragic flaw” of the hero usually involves the concept of hubris, or overweening pride, that leads to disaster.
Macbeth, for instance, has the arrogance to think he can overstep the laws of God and state, and ultimately pays dearly for this arrogance. Macbeth is a tragic hero with a clear tragic flaw: his downfall results from a moral failing and can be seen as divine retribution proportional to his guilt. But Macbeth also contains heavy Christian overtones that would of course be found nowhere in Greek tragedy.
An understanding of Aristotle’s concept of hamartia—and indeed an understanding of Greek tragedy in general—relies on an understanding of the ethics and cosmology of the ancient Greeks. . . . Greek ethics are based more on the notion of virtue than obligation.
What of the Consequences?
In a 2014 article entitled “C.S. Lewis: The Anti-Platonic Platonist,” Grace Tiffany skillfully explores the Platonic echoes in Lewis’ writings. In discussing his literary examples of human failings, she writes:
There are of course Biblical models justifying Lewis’ “negatively capable” presentations of misguided characters . . . An older philosophical source, if not a Platonic one, also justifies mimetic representations of evil by the argument that these are morally purgative.
Imitations of hamartia, or tragic error, produce “fear and pity” (Aristotle, Poetics 1453b)—compassion for the character elicited by a skilled simulation of his psychology, naturally accompanied by a healthy fear of ourselves making similar mistakes. What ensures the fear is, of course, the dramatization of the horrible end to which hamartia has led . . . (Christianity and Literature 63.3).
In 1953, C.S. Lewis wrote to a correspondent that sin was more than merely making a mistake. In doing so, he alludes to the change in the meaning of the word ἁμαρτία.
No. I don’t think sin is completely accounted for by faulty reasoning nor that it can be completely cured by re-education. That view has, indeed, been put forward: by Socrates and, in the early 19th Century, by Godwin.
But I think it overlooked the (to me) obviously central fact that our will is not necessarily determined by our reason. If it were, then, as you say, what are called ‘sins’ would not be sins at all but only mistakes, and would require not repentances but merely correction.
Returning to the literary or dramatic definition of hamartia as a tragic flaw, it seems to me that this term offers a fitting parallel to the word sin.
Ever since humanity’s fall, we suffer the curse of bearing original sin, a tragic flaw. It is a scar that no medical or psychological treatment can cure and no amount of determination can repair. This tragic flaw will be our doom. Unless, that is, there is One who is capable and desirous of restoring us to our original health and purity. One, perhaps, in whose own image you and I were created . . .
This wonder is something well worth pondering—and perhaps one day, writing about.
7 thoughts on “C.S. Lewis & Humanity’s Tragic Flaw”
I took New Testament Greek in college so I knew that word as soon as you mentioned it. Bu hamaratia is humanity’s fatal flaw. It is that disease that is in our blood. It’s funny you mention that word and concept. There is a short book Sci-fi series I would like to do and our galaxy is infected by sin. Since I wanted to build it around the Greek word for truth, “Alethia” it fits.
Thanks for sharing,
Sounds like an interesting series. Including the “matter of sin” in the creation of your fictional world will make it similar to C.S. Lewis’ Space Trilogy. I will be curious to see how you navigate that, especially if you include non-human species.
It’s going to be a while if the rapture doesn’t happen first. It’s sort of a modern Pilgrim’s Progress in a galaxy-wide setting.
Writing certainly does take time. Well, good writing does.
Very cool. I like the confluence of sources going on here.
I’m not sure how the “missing the mark” thing got so popular. It’s a subentry of three senses in Thayer. It is just one conventional use of the word (which in no way means that it synthesizes or summarizes Paul’s meaning). *shrug*
That’s a good insight. Relates to an article I was reading this morning about Jerome’s thoughts on translation… and how they can never replicate with 100% accuracy the original document. Then again, with the vagaries of language itself, as you say, we can’t be certain which shade of a word’s meaning a particular writer was intending.
As to the specific “popularity” of the “missing the mark” interpretation… well, it does provide a pretty vivid image. People like to latch onto such things.
Pingback: C.S. Lewis & Karl Marx « Mere Inkling Press