#tadgh overanalyzes gay tv shows

[live-from-flaturn]

Here's How Kim Theerapanyakul Qualifies as a Greek Tragic Hero:

I accidentally came up with this thesis statement while chatting with @shou-jpeg (as per usual) and they encouraged me to expand on it... so here's the outcome of my academic fandom ramblings!

From page 17 of “The Poetics of Aristotle”, as translated by S.H. Butcher:

1. A perfect tragedy should, as we have seen, be arranged not on the simple but on the complex plan. It should, moreover, imitate actions which excite pity and fear, this being the distinctive mark of tragic imitation. It follows plainly… that the change of fortune presented must not be the spectacle of a virtuous man brought from prosperity to adversity: for this moves neither pity nor fear; it merely shocks us.

Layman's Translation: The perfect tragedy is complicated. No matter what story is used, the main emotional payout should be pity and fear for the Hero. In order to achieve this, you cannot simply punish a good man for no reason. Shock will not induce catharsis [emotional release].

2. Nor, again, that of a bad man passing from adversity to prosperity: for nothing can be more alien to the spirit of Tragedy; it possesses no single tragic quality; it neither satisfies the moral sense nor calls forth pity or fear. 

Layman's Translation: A bad man cannot receive good fortune. That goes against the entire point of tragedy and will only frustrate the audience further. 

3. Nor, again, should the downfall of the utter villain be exhibited. A plot of this kind would, doubtless, satisfy the moral sense, but it would inspire neither pity nor fear; for pity is aroused by unmerited misfortune, fear by the misfortune of a man like ourselves. Such an event, therefore, will be neither pitiful nor terrible.

Layman's Translation: The story cannot end with the downfall of an obvious villain. It satisfies the audience’s desire for justice but doesn’t leave them pitying the Hero or fearing the story’s eventual outcome. Once again, this ending would be void of catharsis/emotional release.

4. There remains, then, the character between these two extremes,—that of a man who is not eminently good and just,- yet whose misfortune is brought about not by vice or depravity, but by some error or frailty. He must be one who is highly renowned and prosperous,—a personage like Oedipus, Thyestes, or other illustrious men of such families.

Layman's Translation: 

A good Tragic Hero must: 

Be royalty or nobility (he might also come from a well-known or wealthy family).

Be morally grey (if he is too Good or too Bad it will prevent the audience from projecting onto him and achieving catharsis). 

Cause his own downfall or “catastrophe” by making a mistake (an extension of his Hamartia, or “error” / ”inherent flaw”).

So how does Kim fulfill the requirements of a Tragic Hero?

He is from a well-known family and has an image to keep in check. Because of his role as Wik/an idol, Kim must present himself as a kind or at least pleasant person to the general public. Much like Oedipus or Electra, Kim has an outward persona whose specific responsibilities play a role in his fall to hubris. 

a. As Kimhan Theerapanyakul he is required to do his father’s bidding on some level. We know he’s at least somewhat beholden to Korn from the scene with Tankhun screaming, “I don’t know where they [Porsche and Chay] have gone!”

2. Does it get any more morally grey than a guy willing to kill a dozen men in cold blood (with his bare hands) to protect his pseudo-ex-boyfriend? Or date an underclassman fanboy only to commit minor felonies against him/his family? Or go against his father (rebellion against the family is a BIG no-no in Greek Tragedy!!!) and attempt to escape the fate of his bloodline? 

3. I doubt this part really needs explaining… But trying to protect Chay by lying to his face and destroying their relationship, only to turn around and beg for Chay’s forgiveness via blatant musical plagiarism, is probably Hamartia at its finest.

4. It's Kim! He is "a man who is not eminently good and just,- yet whose misfortune is brought about not by vice or depravity, but by some error or frailty". His greatest loss is brought about by his own poor decision making and furious need for freedom/independence. His determined self-flagellation only ever hurts the people around him while we as the audience scream for him to stop. He qualifies for the Tragic Sadboy Squad!