Aristotle on Avatar: Considering the Characters

"Character holds the second place. A similar fact is seen in painting. The most beautiful colours, laid on confusedly, will not give as much pleasure as the chalk outline of a portrait. Thus Tragedy is the imitation of an action, and of the agents mainly with a view to the action." Aristotle, Poetics Book VI

In Book XV, Aristotle gives four criteria for good characters:

1. Goodness
2. Propriety
3. True to life
4. Consistent

The main characters (Ang and allies) are morally good. Out of the many different themes and messages of the Avatar series, the one that most thoroughly pervades the show is balance. Not between good and evil (which is an insidious philosophy) but between goods. This chord truly strikes harmonious with the teachings of Aristotle. 
Ang in particular is focused on this very aspect. Now, perhaps he does go to some extremes (no meat, no violence) but in general he is focused on being balanced. This is also something he has to learn throughout the series in order to master the elements. The characters are challenged in respect to balance and goodness many times: from Jet arguing for slaughter to the "Puppet Master" arguing for ultimate control. There are certain points where the characters do fall short (Sakka stealing from the library; Ang lying to the god of the library) but, in general, they stick to the golden mean of goodness.

Are the characters appropriate? Well, Aristotle says that, "There is a type of manly valour; but valour in a woman, or unscrupulous cleverness, is inappropriate." Aristotle might personally consider these cartoons as lacking propriety. However, I think that we can justly apply his philosophy and say that, in their own time and their own culture, the characters of the series are appropriate. For instance, Katara, Suki and Toph all have valour (granted I don't know what exactly Aristotle meant by "manly valour") and fight on the front lines. This, if done by Greek women in the time of Aristotle, would have been indecorous to say the least. In the time, place and culture of the show, women are brave and fight like the rest. Now whether they are appropriate to be seen in our time is up to the individual to decide. As for me and my apartment, we will watch them:

"The poet, in representing men who are irascible or indolent, or have other defects of character, should preserve the type and yet ennoble it." So, while attempting to be true to life the poet should show some of the best qualities of a personality for us to emulate. The series, I think, does well on this point also by showing many of the tpyical attitudes and behaviors of children the age of the heroes in the show while also showing how they are more than the petty actions that they sometimes commit (gambling tricks; stealing; sarcasm).

Finally, are the characters consistent? Well, Sokka is not sarcastic throughout. Yes, the characters are consistent and believable enough to be solid and yet surprising and changing enough to be interesting. In this are they truly struck home.