Aristotle’s Concept of Imitation

Aristotle’s Concept/Theory of Imitation:

Aristotle answered Plato and refuted charge against poets. He
redefined meanings of imitation. Regardless of that whole concept
of idea and copy remained the same. In simple words, Aristotle
agreed that the world was created from an idea and the world was
its copy. He also agreed that a poet imitated the reality/nature but
meaning of word imitation did not mean mere copy. He did not
consider poetry twice away from reality
Imitation is a Creative Process:
Imitation is a creative process in the eyes of Aristotle. He links
poetry with music instead of painting. He says that poetry is
pleasant just like a flute’s sound that is full of harmony, therefore, it
is not right to compare poets with painters and poetry with
painting. A poet, further says Aristotle, does not present things as
they appear but bestows them his imagination. Hence, poetry is not
the process of seeing things and simply converting it to words; a
poet reinvents things with his imagination and experiences.
Aristotle’s concept/theory of imitation can be concluded in
following words:-
“objects which in themselves we view with disgust, we delight to
contemplate when reproduced with minute fidelity: such as the
forms of the most ignoble animals and dead bodies.”
Aristotle – Poetics
Thus, poetry is more philosophical, more conducive to understand
than philosophy itself. He further says:-
“idealised representation of character, emotion, action—under
forms manifest in sense.”
Aristotle – Poetics
Thus, a poet does not tell a lie. He imitates things from his mental
power which can touch the senses, therefore he brings the nature
closer to reality.
Three Modes of Imitation in Aristotle’s Concept/Theory:
Aristotle’s concept/theory describes three modes of imitation. First
chapter of the poetics is relevant in this regard, in which he tries to
explain mode of imitation. Important portion is reproduced as
under:-
“Epic poetry and Tragedy, Comedy also and Dithyrambic poetry, as
also the music of the flute and the lyre in most of their forms, are in
their general conception modes of imitation. They differ, however,
from one another in three respects—their medium, objects and the
manner or mode of imitation, being in each case distinct.”