Plato’s Imitative View of Art.

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Discussion
Conclusion
References

Introduction

Art is almost spiritual activity for the development and implementation of aesthetic values. Art is the kernel of aesthetic culture, which, in turn, includes the aesthetic value, aesthetic needs and abilities (aesthetic perception, aesthetic taste and aesthetic ideal), work on their development and implementation, aesthetic education. Aesthetic aspects are present in the activities of the scientists, social and transformative action in everyday life, in sports, etc. Art is a specialized aesthetic activity. It exists for the realization of aesthetic values, enhances the aesthetic experience. Art was concentrates the aesthetic attitude to the world. An understanding of the essence of art is inseparable from the understanding the world of human nature and views on society. Depending on understanding the essence of art defines its function and origin. An understanding of art as imitative reality, its reflection arises in antiquity and remained popular until the XX century.

Discussion

For Plato art is imitation of the world sensual things. The kingdom of ideas may become the subject of contemplation of a thinker; an artist creates a “shadow of shadows.” Therefore, artistic product deceptively hinders learning the truth, though infectiously for Aristotle art is also based on imitative ability. Imitation is, in fact, cognitive ability. Art as imitative work also includes the moments of pleasure, which are based on the recognition of joy. Art deals with the possible that “could happen”.

The notion of catharsis development belongs to Aristotle; catharsis is the purifying the human soul from lowland passions through contemplation – a special form of cognition. Art necessarily includes an element of fun, teaches, expanding educational horizons. This vision of art was very popular in antiquity and in later time. According to Plutarch, the transition from ignorance to knowing difficult, like a sharp shift from darkness to light. Art should be a lower rank in cognition. The main goal of art is upbringing of mind.

Catharsis impact of art expresses its own aesthetic essence. Art purifies our soul, enlightens, altering our emotions through “compassion and fear”, as Aristotle wrote. The paradox of artistic and aesthetic emotions stimulates the search of activities relevant to these emotions. Art in its aesthetic- catharsis functions “enlightens” clears emotions by increasing their subject. Art draws the rights to self, showing “fake” tears in this drama. Crying the death of any tragic hero, the audience actually feels the opportunities posed by their own death; the aesthetic experience is generalized symbol. It affects our cognitive ability as a whole and not conducive to learning specific phenomena, it will intensify our inner life, but not form separate behavioral skills. Aesthetic emotions have signals awakening in us the capacity for creativity, thirst meaningful, free life.

Plato is not so much interested in the process of creating art, but the problem of its impact on people.

As a consequence of the above situation arises that the art is the main factor in society “ideal” state (the forms of which were developed by Plato) for two reasons:

Art should fill the entire leisure of free-born and accompany them in all serious cases so that they spent all their lives “in the Sacrifice, celebrations and dance” (“Laws”), so that each of them – whether man or woman – would have lived, and played the greatest game” (“Laws”).
Art, for Plato, should on the one hand, to form the soul of every free-born certain, drawn to the legislator, telling them “good things” (“State”) and through the rhythm of “accustomed to the tact” in order to join the “gymnastics with music.” Gymnastics, like art, must play a decisive role in the upbringing of free-born. On the other hand (as a consequence of the first), art must continually, throughout the life of citizens, created to support the spiritual mood.

It was thus on the establishment and maintenance of art means some very peculiar state of the drugs, not the individual, and a public layer.

Taking into consideration the enormous role the arts Plato gave in his “ideal” state, and extremely pessimistic assessment of what the philosopher gave to the real state of the modern period of the artistic life, it is not difficult to imagine the overall magnitude of restraining activities envisaged author of “State” and “laws” in order to turn art into an instrument of justice. The more profound divide between Plato’s presentation on “real art” and the actual state of the art in Plato’s times, the more victims required from art in order to fill the depth.

Art should close, tie some consistency in the whole state ideology, under which law and political virtue entirely coincide with the Beauty and personal happiness of individual. It must provide universal, covering all the individual communication with the outside world form, “putting” which the individual “takes inside” to this ideology, and through which the philosopher-legislator could determine in advance the entire system of external manifestations of each individual, bringing it in line with their “laws”.

In “Poetics” by Aristotle there is a briefly described 3 exemplary ways in poetry (verbal art), which are the characteristics of epic, lyric poetry, and drama. “To imitate in the same and the same could be talking about the event as something separate from themselves, or so that remains to imitate itself, without altering their person or persons representing all depicted as the actions and activities “, “Imitative products” differ on means, on the subject, mode, plus special emotions. “Cleaning passion” (catharsis) is a goal of tragedy; to help the poet through the analysis of images to find the right path to that goal is the task of Plato.

Manufacturing activity creates new things, which do not exist in nature. Art in our sense of the word is to imitate nature. When Aristotle said in Metaphysics that “through the art of having those things, the form which is in the soul” (VII, 7, pp. 121), he was referring to productive activities. But it remains unclear origins of artificial things. Probably they lay in the passive intellect along with the forms of nature, achieved through passive effects on intelligence from both sides (of the representations and from the active mind) or they are creations of the soul – so we never know. But the overall response is still possible to assume: forms of artificial things – this means for implementing the goals and meet the needs that arise in real life of people. As for the art in our sense of the word, it is all easier. The forms of art, works of art are not as something entirely new and unprecedented forms in nature. This imitation of life forms is both natural and artificial. Therefore, for Aristotle, denying the absolute creative arts, in the creation of new forms, art is imitation, mimesis.

So, unlike technology the art is imitative. Aristotle said so in “Poetics”: “The writing epic, tragedy, as well as comedies and dithyramb, as well as most of aulectics with cypharistics – all this is generally nothing more than an imitation” (Aristotle, Poetics, p112).

Many interesting things are written about mimesis. But usually it is not taken into account that mimesis, according to Aristotle, must be understood in the context of his teachings of the form and matter, date and potentialism. As a misunderstanding because of critical manufacturing practices of people unable to understand the origins of artificial things (since eternal forms, but forms of artificial things are created by man), Aristotle interpreted the “fine arts” not as creative as well as imitation. But mimesis is not copying. The artist is free to choose subjects, ways and means of imitation.

Poetry is widely understood as the art of words in general. The forms of epic, tragedy, comedy, dithyramb, auletics (playing the flute), cypharistics enjoyed by such means exemplary, as rhythm, word, harmony, or all together or one of them. Prose uses only words without rhythm and harmony. In the remaining part of “Poetics” mainly tragedy is discussed.

Art can represent the people, improving them, degrading or retaining such as they are. This is a tragedy, comedy and drama. Generally speaking poet’s task is not to say that it, but that might be, as possible because of the probability or necessity. That is why poetry differs from history, so “poetry is more philosophic and serious than history, poetry is concentrated on the general, history – on the particular.” In this judgment Aristotle art, at least in poetry, comes as science. Yet overall there is nothing common in the art and science, in the first case is typical-figurative, and the second – concepts. Aristotle felt this.

So, mimesis – is imitation, but imitation relatively freely because of the diversity of funds, and ways of emulation, but also because of a synthesis of art, not a single portrayed, but overall, not what it was, and what could be. And download a substantial being portrayed in the unit, and in concrete action, but only retained in the unit that serves substantially. Here freedom exemplary is manifested, and activism. This idea is built on the example of Aristotle tragedy.

In “Poetics” there is a well-known definition of tragedy by Aristotle: “The tragedy is important imitation of action and finished with a [certain] amount, [produced] speech, heard in different ways, in its various parts, [produced] in action, not in narration , And commits through compassion and fear such passions cleansing “(VI, in 1449, with. 120). In doing so, he explains that “heard speech” – speech, having rhythm, harmony and tune that in some parts of this tragedy “hearing” takes place only meters (special cases rhythms), while in others – and even tunes. These and musical part – means exemplary; spectacle means the way; stories, characters, the idea is to be followed. At the same time legends are the imitation of action, the combination of events; nature is that compels us to call actors such, this propensity of people; thought is what the speakers indicate that something concrete or, conversely, are more or less the total judgment. Aristotle sees the most important thing in tragedy not in the nature of people, and in legends, in action, in connection events. Can tragedy be without characters, but the tragedy is impossible without action – “the beginning and as if the soul of tragedy is legends, and [only] in second place – characters” (VI, and 1450, pp. 122).

The activity of Mimesis in the tragedy is in the selection of depicted action to ensure that the tragedy was integrity, and this philosopher defines the volume of the tragedy highlights the need for unity of action, indicated the dynamics of the tragic actions.

With the help of four “reasons” (or principles) Aristotle establishes a distinction between natural and cultural things. Things (substance) which have all four “reasons”, including acting of course, are natural. The standard example is a grain grown under normal conditions in the plant, which it intended to become. This happens without human intervention in acting, and in the cause of the landing process of growth. On the other hand, things that require changes to its human intervention, in terms of acting, and ultimate causes are cultural things. The standard example is the lump of clay, which form into the vase.

Cultural things are connected with human creative activity. It may be of two types. We can talk about creating what is missing in nature, but that is beneficial to human welfare, for example, the production of tools. You can also talk about the imitation of nature, creating copies of existing in it. An example is a painting depicting a running dog that is a work of art, which gives us pleasure, without being useful. Both of these types of activities included in the Greek concept of art are tehne (techne). But only last fits the current understanding of art.

Art, according to Aristotle, is characterized by two points. It is to create a copy, to emulate. And it gives us pleasure in itself, regardless of the usefulness. The essence of art is that it is a copy, which in itself is a pleasure.

Understanding the art as a backup (imitation) comes from Plato. But as Aristotle otherwise interprets the teachings he treats imitation (and learning) differently than Plato. For Aristotle “forms” exist in certain things. Consequently, for him sensual things are more of equal status in relation to the forms than to Plato. Thus, the art of sensual things as copying represents great value for Aristotle than for Plato. At the same time, Aristotle has a more democratic point of view on the understanding that is necessary for governance and life. As a result, Aristotle gives positive (in cognitive and political senses) assessment of different types of art.

Compared to Plato Aristotle has a great analytical and differentiated inclinations. For example, he distinguishes between theory (metaphysics, mathematics and natural philosophy), practice(ethics and politics) and poetics. These activities vary. Each of them is largely “self-determined” on the basis of its own preconditions.

Understanding of the art as copying related to the submission that people are naturally willing to learn and enjoys learning and sensual perception. (The word “aesthetics” comes from the Greek word aisthenesthai, meaning “to perceive with feelings”). Simulating real teaches us to perceive things in special way. For example, we may see a new party known to us or to experience in a new way we have already seen. Or learn something that has already been seen and experienced.

So, Aristotle connects aesthetics and ethics. For him, art has a moral responsibility. It may facilitate or clean. The most important function of art is catharsis that is elevating and facilitating clearance.

The good life is the harmonious implementation of the inherent abilities of us, resulting in, we are virtuous. We must update our balanced potency. Precisely because of this, we must avoid extremes, stemming from the excessive development of some of our qualities at the expense of other emerging or when leaving abroad as our innate abilities and capabilities, both inside and outside the limits of natural resources. (The environmental consequences of such positions are fairly obvious. Exponential growth here would be a major example of the destructive madness). Proceeding from this position, Aristotle attributes the arts function restore spiritual balance. Acquainted with the creation of art (for example, musical or dramatic work), we can restore a harmony and peace and, ultimately, to ennoble our mind (spirit).

According to Aristotle, tragedy compassion and fear clears the emotions. And they are caused precisely by the fractures. Compassion can be felt by viewer only to undeserved suffering hero, therefore, changes in the tragedy and turn in the fate of the hero must not occur from misery to happiness and not because of depravity tragic person, but because of the “big mistake”. Only in this way, Aristotle thinks, the action could cause fear in the souls of the audience (trembling) and compassion – only by equating himself with the hero. Therefore, the tragedy gives viewers the pleasure – is “the pleasure of compassion and fear through imitation of them” (XIV, in 1453, with. 133).

This is a tragedy effect – catharsis. Unfortunately, Aristotle does not show this in details, though promises, but no explanation came before us. Aristotelian tragic catharsis has generated a lot of hypotheses. Most likely that the tragic effect, forcing the audience to experience fears and compassion, shake their souls and frees them from hidden internal stresses.

In conclusion it would be appropriate to generalize all the theories about the attitude to art as to the form of imitation.

Aristotle (mimesis and catharsis): All of the art and literature are imitative. The art does not deal with reality but with the things that could happen. The essence of the arts is knowledge of the truth, and it is possible to learn the truth through mimesis. Lying in arts is permissible, if it contributes to image.

Plato: “The imitative art is far from reality. It is only slightly refers to any belongings, and then it goes only ghostly display. Imitation – stands at the third place of the essence “. Plato denied the cognitive knowledge of meaning of poetry and believed that it relaxes human soul. Has a great impact of the psychic of every human and has a great public value.

In Plato’s idealization of objective art it is possible to see the existence of two worlds – the world – materialistic, the world – ideas. Pillars of Creation are the eternal ideas. Each material object before encountered, was the eternal idea. Being materialized, the idea loses the eternity and becomes one of the physical structures surrounding the world. The task of the true knowledge is to see ideal essence for individual items. It is through the internal world. Artists and poets, imitating material objects, create their works being speculative, and heartless.

Conclusion

Any work, according to Plato, evades of the truth achievements and does not deserve the right to exist. Creative arts lead away from the moral existence. Aristotle believed that realizing the world through the creative works, people are not rejected, and are approaching to the truth.

References

Aristotle, Poetics, Penguin Classics (1997).

Plato, The Republic, W. W. Norton & Company (1996).

Click Here To Order Now!

Plato’s Imitative View of Art.

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)