of his own actions almost entirely because he only encourages others to do violence.
Iago would be impotent without Othello's simmering anger, and Othello would remain good without Iago's evil influence (Bradley 41). We understand this as an audience, or as readers, from the first time we see the two of them interacting with each other, for there is never any doubt in our minds who is the chief instigator of all of the violence and terror that will result in the play. We know from the very beginning what will happen in this play, even if the characters themselves do not, which provides us with a different experience (because of the particular tragic nature of the characters of Othello and Iago) than does watching Romeo and Juliet, for example, when each time we hold out for the possibility that this time - this time unlike every other time before - Romeo will arrive at the tomb a moment later and embrace a warm and living Juliet and they will live happily ever after, dandling their grandchildren on their knees. But here we know that there is no possibility of a happy ending because while it is just barely possible to outwit the fates, once a human as evil as Iago intervenes there is very nothing that can be done.
We can look at Othello in many ways as providing a bridge between classical and neoclassical concepts about tragedy (in which the tragedy in each case results from a combination of fate and inherent moral flaws, which are themselves a fateful inheritance from the gods) and the modern sense of tragedy, in w
...