Aristotle on Avatar: Plotting the Traits

Aristotle says further on plots that they need to be of proper length."The limit as fixed by the nature of the drama itself is this: the greater the length, the more beautiful will the piece be by reason of its size, provided that the whole be perspicuous." ~ Aristotle Poetics Book VII

What the Philosopher means by this and further explains in the book is that the whole poem must be long enough to be beautiful but short enough to be
seen from beginning to end with the whole still in memory. Now the Last Airbender series, I argue, is certainly long enough to be beautiful, covering three full seasons of TV, and also that it is short enough to be "perspicuous". This holds true at least relatively. These days, the remarkable thing about this series is not that it went on for three whole seasons, but that it only went on for three seasons, despite being very popular. Popular shows these days most often continue much longer than this (e.g. The X Files with 9 seasons and 2 movies, or The Simpsons with 13 seasons, so far, and one movie). Although it would be difficult (with 24.4 hours of screen time) to watch the whole thing in one sitting, it is possible (in part due to the flashbacks) to watch the whole thing and have a good grasp of the story as a whole. Yet, it is still long enough to allow for the events and occurrences that can lead Ang from a naive and weak boy to an Avatar capable of defeating the Firelord.

Unity, according to Aristotle, is crucial for any story. Unity, he says, "does not, as some persons think, consist in the Unity of the hero." It is not that everything that happens must have something to do with the hero, Ang. Rather, he says, it must all be part of an organic whole imitating a single action which, without each of the parts, will be "disjointed". I want to deal with both this and the next aspect of a good story which is that it must not be episodic. "Of all plots and actions the epeisodic are the worst." While Aristotle says this, we must keep in mind that he holds up the Odyssey and the Iliad as great stories that avoid this pitfall. That being the case, I think that we can argue the Avatar series also (mostly) avoids this great pitfall. It does this by not depending entirely on the unity of hero ( which would allow any stories that have to do with Ang in) but focus on whether or not an event or episode moves the story along to its conclusion. If Aristotle had issue with all sorts of episodes, he surely would not hold up the Odyssey which has clear distinctions of events as episodes (e.g. the Island of the Cyclops, the Island of the Lotus Eaters, the Island of the Sun God, the Island of the Witch, the Island of Calypso).

Where the story of the Avatar fails is that it is, in the end, a comedy. Of this, Aristotle says the following: "In the second rank comes the kind of tragedy which some place first. Like the Odyssey, it has a double thread of plot, and also an opposite catastrophe for the good and for the bad. It is accounted the best because of the weakness of the spectators." In spite of this, I, for one, am very glad indeed that this story is a comedy.