Some Notes on Plato and

Aristotle and Mimetic Theory of

Art

Some Notes on Plato and

Aristotle and Mimetic Theory of
Art
And a lot of other stuff.

The Mimetic Theory of Art:

Art is essentially an imitation of Nature.

The Mimetic Theory of Art:

Think of the first four letters: M I M E
Art is essentially an mimicry of nature
Paintings are supposed to look just like
the real thing etc.
Arguably the oldest and most widely held
view on the nature of art. (View held by
Plato, et alia.)
Seems to capture a lot of art (certainly
within Platos time).

The Mimetic Theory of Art:

Problems:
How does this handle music?, abstract art?
What is mimesis exactly? (Imitation,
mirroring, perceptual equivalence,
counterfeiting, idealization, representation?)
If I say that the point of a picture is to capture
the world exactly as it really is, what am I
assuming?
(Star Trek story here- or, to save time, picture of
Grand Canyon)

The Mimetic Theory of Art:

But lets look as Platos View anyway:
Believed that art is essentially an imitation
of nature. (Mimetic Theory of Art)
Therefore, (according to Plato) art is at
best:
(1) useless and
(2) potentially dangerous.

Platos View:
Art is Essentially Mimesis
Plato is convinced that the arts form a natural
grouping and that they all share a common Form
I.E.: That which all and only Arts have in common by
virtue of which we recognize each to be an art and by
virtue of which each is an art.
Not so much an assumption, as the consequence of
his Metaphysical Theory of Forms.
We rightly gather them together linguistically
because of a metaphysical reality.

Platos View:
Art is Essentially Mimesis
As 20th Century Formalist Clive Bell put is:
"either all works of visual art have some
common quality, or when we speak of
'works of art' we gibber."

Platos View:
Art is Essentially Mimesis
1. Art was useless:
It serves no useful purpose in society.
As a "Imitation of Nature" it added no
knowledge. No intellectual value(The same value could be added by simply
by holding up a mirror to the world which would
be far less costly.)
According his metaphysics, art is an imitation of
an imitation, thus barely real at all.

Platos View:
Art is Essentially Mimesis
Art was potentially dangerous for several
reasons:
A.) Art was essentially deceptive.
The whole aim of art was to deceive. Success was
achieved when the spectator mistook an imitation for
reality.
Furthermore, artists were unconcerned with
facts/truth. It made no difference to artists nor to the
success of their works whether the images or stories
they depict were real or their messages true or good.

Platos View:
Art is Essentially Mimesis
B.) Art was mainly concerned with
sensual pleasure.
Art seems directed entirely towards
pleasing the senses and ignoring the
mind, intellect, or concepts.

Platos View:
Art is Essentially Mimesis
Remember that, according to Platonic Mind/Body Dualism, our bodies are the least
valuable, least permanent, least "real" aspects of our personalities.
Further, according to Platos Rationalism, our senses are incapable of providing us
with genuine knowledge since they only gather impressions from an everchanging
physical world but not immaterial/invisible forces which guide, direct and sustain the
physical world.

Thus our senses and, consequently, art are

"metaphysically" misguided since it is directed towards
illusion and not "reality."
Further, Art serves to perpetuate and sustain this
misdirection, keeping us ignorant of truth, justice,
goodness and "real" beauty.

Platos View:
Art is Essentially Mimesis
B.) Art was mainly concerned with sensual pleasure.
NB: Note this has not only a Metaphysical and Epistemological
Dimension; this has an Ethical Dimension as well.
This has Ethical overtones, not so much in the Later Christian
Condemnation of Sensualism, but rather the more Greek notion, that
this was a pathetic way to waste a human life. (Too much T.V.- Cartoons)
Ethical in the sense that this is simply not what one (human) ought to
do.
Think of the uncanny similarity between the imprisoned slaves in Platos
Allegory of the Cave who mistakenly take the shadows to be all there is
to reality, an those who in a darkened cinema sob uncontrollably when
Leonardo DiCaprio goes down for the last time.

Platos View:
Art is Essentially Mimesis
B.) Art was mainly concerned with sensual
pleasure.
- Humankind lingers unregenerately in Platos cave, still
reveling, its age old habit, in mere images of truth. (Susan
Sontag)
- It must be admitted that if imitation is the sole purpose of
the graphic arts, it is surprising that the works of such arts
are ever looked upon as more than curiosities, or
ingenious toys, are ever taken seriously by grown-up
people. (Roger Fry)

Platos View:
Art is Essentially Mimesis
c.) Art is psychologically de-stabilizing.
Human existence is, in great part, a struggle to master the emotions and
sensual urges by using reason and intellect according to Plato. (His tripartite theory of the Psyche)
Therefore art was dangerous and counterproductive to this end (i.e.
rational self-mastery) since it appeals not to reason and intellect, but to
the psychological forces which constantly try to over-through reason,
namely passion and emotion.

"Poetry feeds and waters the passions instead of drying

them up; she lets them rule, although they ought to be
controlled, if mankind are ever to increase in happiness
and virtue"

Platos View:
Art is Essentially Mimesis
D.) Art leads to immorality.
Art was unconcerned with morality, sometimes even teaching immoral
lessons. (The Iliad) Morality, it would seem, has nothing to do with a
works success as art.
Plato worries that such art would encourage immorality in the citizens of
this state. People might uncritically accept and admire immoral, vicious
traits when they are attractively packaged by skilled artists (distinction
between truth and illusion/ physicians and cooks/ heath and
cosmetics/ beauty and glamour.)

Like a skilled chef, artists are only interested in pleasing the palate,
even if it poisons the diner. Since (mimetic) art is institutionally
divorced from truth, goodness or any concern with 'real' beauty, it
creates an environment of superficial "flavors" where all sorts of
atrocities can be made to seem a tempting confection.

Platos View:
Art is Essentially Mimesis
E.) Art was politically dangerous, a threat to the common good.
Similar to the point made earlier (c), Plato worried that strong art which
appeals to emotions stirs up negative emotions which we are trying to
control.
But this is more than just a problem for the individual. For a people with
a history of "mania," strong, emotion-stirring art is rightly seen as a threat
to the good of state/community.
It was, therefore correctly the concern of government.

NB: This is similar to the criticism leveled by some today against

violence and sex in the media. Like Plato, they argue that violence
and sex in the media cause us to be a more violent, sexually
obsessed culture. This affects not just the people who consume the
violent images, but the entire community of which they are a part.

Platos View:
Art is Essentially Mimesis
Art was potentially dangerous for several
reasons:
A.) Art was essentially deceptive. (Ep.)
B.) Art was mainly concerned with sensual
pleasure. (M, Ep., Eth.)
C.) Further, Art was psychologically de-stabilizing.
(for the individual) (Eth., Ps.)
D.) Art leads to immorality. (Eth.)
E.) Art was politically dangerous. (threat to the
common good) (Po. Ps.)

Platos View
there is an ancient quarrel between philosophy and
poetry; of which there are many proofs, such as the
saying of 'the yelping hound howling at her lord,' or
of one 'mighty in the vain talk of fools,' and 'the mob
of sages circumventing Zeus,' and the 'subtle
thinkers who are beggars after all'; and there are
innumerable other signs of ancient enmity between
them. Notwithstanding this, let us assure our sweet
friend and the sister arts of imitation that if she will
only prove her title to exist in a well-ordered State
we shall be delighted to receive her --we are very
conscious of her charms; but we may not on that
account betray the truth.

Platos View
If her defense fails, then, my dear friend, like other persons who are
enamoured of something, but put a restraint upon themselves when
they think their desires are opposed to their interests, so too must
we after the manner of lovers give her up, though not without a
struggle. We too are inspired by that love of poetry which the
education of noble States has implanted in us, and therefore we
would have her appear at her best and truest; but so long as she is
unable to make good her defense, this argument of ours shall be a
charm to us, which we will repeat to ourselves while we listen to her
strains; that we may not fall away into the childish love of her which
captivates the many. At all events we are well aware that poetry
being such as we have described is not to be regarded seriously as
attaining to the truth; and he who listens to her, fearing for the safety
of the city which is within him, should be on his guard against her
seductions and make our words his law.

Platos View
At all events we are well aware that poetry
being such as we have described is not
to be regarded seriously as attaining to
the truth; and he who listens to her,
fearing for the safety of the city which
is within him, should be on his guard
against her seductions and make our
words his law.

Platos View

Entire Republic can be seen as an argument for allowing Philosophy

to do the work accorded to Poetry

In Platos defense, today it is widely agreed that the arts do not

produce the kind of reliable knowledge or moral wisdom that the
sciences and philosophical argument produce. (And Artist still bay at
Science and Philosophy)

But do we beg the question against the arts by looking exclusively

for propositional knowledge (see renderings of molecules).

Arthur Danto reminds us, "Plato did not precisely propose that art
was mimesis, but that mimetic art was pernicious."

Aristotles Critical Responses

Aristotle was Plato's most famous student
and greatest critic.
Disagreeing with much else that Plato
said, Aristotle agreed that art was
essentially an Mimesis.
But, he maintained, (good) art was neither
useless nor dangerous, but rather natural
and beneficial.

Aristotles Critical Responses

Crucial to Aristotle's defense of art is his
Rejection of Plato's Dualism.
Man is not an "embodied" intellect, longing for the spiritual
release of death, but rather and animal with, among all the other
faculties, the ability to use reason and to create.

Rejection of Platos Rationalism (w.r.t. Human

Nature)
We must study humans as we would study other animals to
discover what is their "nature." Look among the species; see
who are the thriving and successful and in what activities do they
engage? For Aristotle, this is how to determine what is and is
not appropriate for a human and human societies.

Rejections that Mimesis = Mirroring Nature

Aristotles Critical Responses:

Art is Not Useless
It is Natural:
It is natural for human beings to imitate.
Any human society which is healthy will be a society where there
is imitative art.
Nothing is more natural than for children to pretend.

Art production and training is a necessary part of any

education since it uses and encourages the imaginative
manipulation of ideas.
Nothing is more natural than for human beings to create using
their imagination.
Since art is imitation, it is an imaginative use of concepts; at its
heart art is "conceptual," "intellectual."

Aristotles Critical Responses:

Good Art is Not Dangerous

A.

Art is not deceptive:

Artists must accurately portray reality to be successful.

(Drama must accurately portray psychological reality in order for characters to
be believable and their actions understandable.)

It teaches effectively and it teaches the truth.

(Convincing and powerful drama is convincing and powerful because it reveals
some truth of human nature.)

Introduces the concept of "Organic Unity" the idea that in any good work
of art each of the parts must contribute to the overall success of the
whole.
(Just as in biological organisms each part contributes to the overall health and
wellbeing of the creature, so too in good- works of art, each element must
contribute to the thematic development. This is another way in which works
of art reflects or imitates reality.)

Unified action, "with its several incidents so closely connected that the
transposal or withdrawal of any one of them will disjoin and
dislocate the whole,"

Aristotles Critical Responses:

Good Art is Not Dangerous
B.) Sensuous art is not a bad thing:
Aristotle did not believe that the mind was one thing
and the body was something else and therefore
Aristotle did not have the bias against physical
pleasures that Plato did.
The only way of acquiring knowledge at all, according
to Aristotle, was through the senses and so
developing, exercising and sharpening those senses
through art was a healthy thing to do.
Art was not solely concerned with the sensual
pleasures, but rather was/should be an intellectual,
conceptual affair.

Aristotles Critical Responses:

Good Art is Not Dangerous
D. (Good) Art is institutionally tied to Morality and Truth
(Successful Tragic) Drama always teaches morality. When
trying to understand how tragedies achieve their peculiar effect
(Pathos), he notes the psychology and morality on which they
must be based.

NB: Aristotle believed that drama imitated not only "events"

but actions. As such they imitated intended behaviors,
psychological forces and the unseen "inner life" of
persons.
Note too that he unwittingly set up two functions for a work
of art to fulfill; to imitate nature perceptual detail and to
imitate natures "organic unity" (music, architecture).

Aristotles Critical Responses:

Good Art is Not Dangerous
C&E.
Aristotle agreed that art did stir up negative emotions but, he
claims it then purged these in an harmless, healthy way.

Doctrine of Catharsis"
Art was neither psychologically de-stabilizing nor politically
destructive.
Art is a therapeutic part of the healthy life of not only the
individually, but of the nation.

NB: Similar to arguments made today in defense of

graphically sexual or violent art or even of pornography
or of violence on television.

Aristotles Critical Responses:

Mimesis Imitation
Mimesis Imitation (Mirroring)
More like:
Rendering
Depicting
Construing
Idealizing
Representing

NB: Unlike mirroring, these are acts of

intellect.

Aristotles Critical Responses

Poetry is more Philosophical than History
"poetry is something more philosophic and of graver
import than history (He means a mere chronicle of
events here.), since its statements are of the nature
rather of universals, whereas those of history are
singulars."
Poetry describes "not the thing that has happened"
as Aristotle imagines history does "but a kind of thing
that might happen, (i.e. what is possible) as being
probable or necessary"
Thus a mere mirror of history NOT art. Art is
necessarily conceptual/cognitive.

Aristotles Critical Responses

A further point here:
Art displays and transmits this knowledge in an
unique way. The audience must understand
the universals at work in the drama to be
carried away by the drama, and in that sense
they must internalize, adopt it as his or her
own, the knowledge of human nature and
morality utilized by the playwright.

Platos and Aristotles View:

Art is Essentially Mimesis

Art was potentially dangerous for

several reasons:
A.) Art was essentially
deceptive. (Ep.)
B.) Art was mainly concerned
with sensual pleasure. (M,
Ep., Eth.)
C.) Further, Art was
psychologically destabilizing. (for the
individual) (Eth., Ps.)
D.) Art leads to immorality.
(Eth.)
E.) Art was politically
dangerous. (threat to the
common good) (Po. Ps.)

Art was not potentially dangerous for

several reasons:
A.) (Good) Art was essentially
truthful. (Ep.)
B.) Art was mainly concerned
with sensual pleasure, and
thats a Good thing. (M, Ep.,
Eth.)
C.) Art was psychologically
healthy (for the individual)
(Eth., Ps.)
D.) Art leads to moral
knowledge. (Eth.)
E.) Art was politically necessary
and healthy. (Po. Ps.)

Nelson Goodman
Art as Representation
Can be seen as a continuation of the idea
that Art is (and is essentially) about
something.
He rejects the idea that Art is an Imitation of
nature if imitation is understood as mirroring
or copying.
He accepts the idea that art-making is a
cognitive act of representing reality.

Goodmans Analysis of
Representation in Visual Art
Two Questions Arise:

What is the mechanism of representation?

If representational doesnt depend of Copying

or Mirroring, why is it that so much
Representational Art DOES seem to resemble
the objects, etc. they represent?

Goodmans Analysis of
Representation in Visual Art
What is the Mechanism of representation?
Illusion theory?

But this overlooks how people should and do respond to (even very
realistic) art.
Resemblance theory?

But resemblance to what and in what way?

(Anything might be said to resemble anything else. No simile is,
technically, false.)
Well

Goodmans Criticisms of
Resemblance Theory
A: Resemblance to the way the world really
is.
But according to Goodman, the world really
is as many ways at is can be truly
described. And no picture can capture
that.

Goodmans Criticisms of
Resemblance Theory
A: The way the world really is for
perception. (whos)
A: The way the world really is for human
perception. (which ones?)
A: The way the world really is for ordinary,
normal human perception. (more spcs)
(from a particular angle, at a certain distance, with one eye closed,
through a peep-hole, the see eye unmoving)

Yikes!

Goodmans Criticisms of
Resemblance Theory
As the object looks to the normal eye, at proper range, from a favorable
angle, in good light, without instrumentation, unprejudiced by affections or
animosities or interests, and unembellished by thought or interpretation.

In short, the object is to be copied as seen under septic conditions by the

free and innocent eye.

But this requires that there BE such a thing as an innocent eye.

Ernst Gombrich claims that there is no innocent eye

The eye comes always ancient to its work, obsessed by its own past and by
old and new insinuations of the ear, nose, tongue, fingers, heart, and brain.
It does not much mirror as take and make.

Goodman Looks at
Representation
Maybe were on the wrong track.
Notice resemblance is neither necessary
nor sufficient for representation.
Further, resemblance is a symmetric
relation and representation is not.
What is it for X to represent Y?

Goodman Looks at
Representation
What is it for X to represent Y?
According to Goodman, there is no Natural
representation.
All representation depends on a pre-existing symbol
system.
If pictures represent, they must be understood as
symbols within a symbol system.

Goodman Looks at
Representation
But this implies that we must learn to
read even realistic pictures. (And
photos.)
This process may be automatic and
unconscious, but it is no less cognitive than
hearing and understanding a sentence in
ones native language.
We learn to see x as standing for, or even
resembling, y.

Goodman Looks at
Representation
A representation or description, by virtue of how it
classifies and is classified, may make or mark
connections, analyze objects, and organize the
world (as we experience it).
Grasps fresh and significant relationships.
Standard sorting is often serviceable, even if humdrum.
Novel uses of old categories bring out neglected likenesses and
differences, force unaccustomed associations, and in some
measure remake our world.

Goodman Looks at
Representation
EX: His graduate assistant is panting puppy.
This requires you to see both as members of the same
set and thus clarifies a heretofore overlooked property.
(Perhaps both belong to the class of things which seek
approval give enthusiastic, uncritical support.)
NOTE: If representing is a matter of classifying objects
rather than of imitating them, of characterizing rather
than of copying, it is not a matter of passive recording.

Goodman Looks at
Representation
And if this aim of the picture is achieved, it effects a
realignment in our thinking.
(So long as theres poetry art- 1984 cant happen.)
When such a realignment is interesting and useful, the
picture, like a crucial experiment, can be said to make a
genuine contribution to knowledge. (We can think new
thoughts.)

Goodman Looks at
Representation
Consider this:
To the complaint that his portrait of Gertrude Stein did
not look like her, Picasso is said to have answered:
"No matter; it will.
On Goodmans view, this is because we will come to see
Gertrude Stein in terms of her portrait.
Nature is a product of art and discourse

Goodman Looks at
Representation
But what about Realism in Representation?

Even if not necessary, dont (some) Realistic

Representations achieve representation via noncognitive means (i.e. visual resemblance)?

Goodman Looks at
Representation
What constitutes realism of representation?
Possible Answer #1:
A picture is realistic just to the extent that it is a
successful illusion, leading the viewer to suppose that it
is, or that it has the characteristics of, what it represents.
Advantages over the resemblance theory because
it emphasizes the responses and expectations of the viewer
(rather than content to be copied).
It can account for fictive representations (no question of
resemblance to what?)

Goodman Looks at
Representation
Problems:
1. What deceives depends upon what is observed/expected, and what
is observed/expected varies with interests and habits.
What will deceive me into supposing that an object of a given kind is before me
depends upon what I have noticed about such objects, and this in turn is
affected by the way I am used to seeing them depicted.
Consider the various attempts to mask the signs of aging. What would have
worked in the 1700s no longer does because we have come to notice other
signs.

2. If the probability of actual confusion is 1, we no longer have

representation; we have identity.
3. Probability of real confusion seldom rises above zero. Seeing a
picture as a picture precludes mistaking it for anything else.
4. Appropriate conditions of observation defeat deception.
According to Goodman, When viewing a representational painting I recognize
the images as signs for the objects and characteristics represented, signs
that work instantly and unequivocally without being confused with what they
denote.

Goodman Looks at
Representation
Possible Answer #2:

For realistic representation, the most realistic picture is the one that
provides the greatest amount of pertinent information.

Problem:

Reversed perspective and colors, appropriately interpreted, yields

exactly the same information. Realistic and unrealistic pictures may
be equally informative. Since it provides the same true information it
is faithful though not realistic. Thus correctness or truth is not a
sufficient condition for realism.

Goodman Looks at
Representation
But it might be objected, in really realistic pictures, information
contained easily issues form it. Like second nature
Well, not if you accept Goodman Big Point:
Even Realistic Pictures must be learned to be read.
Thus:

How easily the information issues from the picture depends upon how stereotyped the
mode of representation is (upon how commonplace the labels and their uses have
become).

Realism is relative. (i.e. determined by the system of representation standard for a given
culture or person at a given time).

No pictures (real or possible) are Absolutely realistic.

Whether a picture is judged to be realistic depends at any time entirely upon what frame or
mode is then standard for the one doing the judging.

Goodman Looks at
Representation
Realistic representation, in brief, depends not upon imitation or
illusion or information but upon inculcation.
Our (western) tendency to link representation and realism and
resemblance stems from the fact that our representational customs,
which govern realism, also tend to generate resemblance.

Consider the various attempts to mask the signs of aging. What

would have worked in the 1700s no longer does because we have
come to notice other signs.

Individual judgements of similarity are more or less objective and

categorical, but the assessment of total resemblance is subject to
influences galore, and our representational customs are not least
among these.

Goodman Looks at
Representation

Thus there is no the crucial difference between pictorial and verbal

properties, between nonlinguistic and linguistic symbols or systems,
which makes a difference between representation in general and
description.

Goodman subsumes a pictorial representation under the category of

a description.

Analogy between pictorial representation and verbal description.

Reference to an object is a necessary condition for depiction or

description of it, but no degree of resemblance is a necessary
or sufficient condition for either.

Goodman Looks at
Representation

Application and classification of a label are the products of

stipulation and habituation in varying proportions.
The choice among systems is free; but given a system, the question
whether a newly encountered object is a desk or a unicornpicture or is
represented by a certain painting is a question of the propriety, under
that system, of projecting the predicate "desk" or the predicate "unicornpicture" or the painting over the thing in question, and the decision both
is guided by and guides usage for that system.

Representation is thus disengaged from perverted ideas of it as

an idiosyncratic physical process like mirroring, and is
recognized as a Symbolic relationship that is relative and
variable.