Theory of Mimesis
Plato, Aristotle, and Mimesis
As literary critics, Plato and Aristotle disagree profoundly about the value of art in human society. Plato attempts to strip artists of the power and prominence they enjoy in his society, while Aristotle tries to develop a method of inquiry to determine the merits of an individual work of art. It is interesting to note that these two disparate notions of art are based upon the same fundamental assumption: that art is a form of mimesis, imitation. Both philosophers are concerned with the artist's ability to have significant impact on others. It is the imitative function of art which promotes disdain in Plato and curiosity in Aristotle. Examining the reality ...
Want to read the rest of this paper?
Join Essayworld today to view this entire essay
and over 50,000 other term papers
|
reality, Truth. Truth exists only in intellectual abstraction, that is, paradoxically, more real than concrete objects. The universal essence, the Idea, the Form of a thing, is more real and thus more important than its physical substance. The physical world, the world of appearances experienced through the senses, does not harbor reality. This tangible world is an imperfect reflection of the universal world of Forms. Human observations based on these reflections are, therefore, highly suspect. At best, the tangible fruit of any human labor is "an indistinct expression of truth" (Republic X, 22). Because knowledge of truth and knowledge of good are virtually inseparable to Plato, he counsels rejection of the physical in favor of embracing reason in an abstract, intellectual, and ultimately more human, existence. Art is removed from any notion of real truth, an inherently flawed copy of an already imperfect world. Art as an imitation is irrelevant to what is real.
Aristotle ...
Get instant access to over 50,000 essays.
Write better papers. Get better grades.
Already a member? Login
|
of tragedy gives it inherent relevance to Aristotle's concept of reality (Ch. 4, 44).
The actual process of imitation employed by the artist seems to underscore each philosopher's vision of reality. A Platonic artist lacks any substantial knowledge of the subject that is imitated. Three degrees of separation prevent the artist from providing an authentic representation or insight: the ethereal Form of a thing, the physical manifestation of a thing, and knowledge of the physical manifestation. An artist merely copies the surface, the appearance, of a thing without the need for understanding or even awareness of its substance. The artist is "an imitator of images and is very far ...
Succeed in your coursework without stepping into a library.
Get access to a growing library of notes, book reports,
and research papers in 2 minutes or less.
|
CITE THIS PAGE:
Theory of Mimesis. (2012, September 21). Retrieved April 25, 2024, from http://www.essayworld.com/essays/Theory-of-Mimesis/101508
"Theory of Mimesis." Essayworld.com. Essayworld.com, 21 Sep. 2012. Web. 25 Apr. 2024. <http://www.essayworld.com/essays/Theory-of-Mimesis/101508>
"Theory of Mimesis." Essayworld.com. September 21, 2012. Accessed April 25, 2024. http://www.essayworld.com/essays/Theory-of-Mimesis/101508.
"Theory of Mimesis." Essayworld.com. September 21, 2012. Accessed April 25, 2024. http://www.essayworld.com/essays/Theory-of-Mimesis/101508.
|
Save
Report