Socrates, Gu Kaizi (顾恺之) and their revolu ons in art

Ancient Greece and ancient China, it is well-known, are two of the

most refined civiliza ons of the past world. It is well-known, at the same
me, that these two civiliza ons were extremely different and focused their
effort in different direc ons. Despite the differences exis ng between the
two cultures, which, for the record, I think they mutually enhance their
beauty, it may be interes ng to establish a comparison between the two
cultures under the light of their universal human component. In order to do
so, I believe that discussing a similar turning point in Ancient Greek and
Chinese ar s c and philosophic development may be an appropriate way.

In this essay, I will examine an essen al turning point in the thought of

the two different cultures applied to arts, which I believe it to stem from the
same human need. Star ng from the philosophy, it spanned the art fields in
par cular, where it had (and s ll has) its best representa on through some
inspired ar sts. I will take four symbolic art pieces to be er show the new
tendency the ar sts focused on and then I will analyze the specific principle
which guided them.

The third
Century b.C. Er
Ya ( 尔 雅 ), when
it discusses
pain ng, says
that they consist
in the shape,
appearance
1
(画，形也) . In
accordance with the Er Ya, the Shuo Wen Jie Zi (说文解字) recites that the
2
shapes have to be coherent with their appearance (形，象形也) . These
words, further supported by other works, reveal the ancient Chinese
3
aesthe cs of the ‘‘represe-nta on from life’’ (写生 xie sheng) . This style is
evident in po ery or mural pain ngs. The ‘‘representa on of the true’’ (写
真 xie zhen) in Han (汉) dynasty shares the same roots of the ‘‘Xie sheng’’
and they both aim at the reflec on of the outer phenomenal world or of
4
the outer human features .
Two gentlemen in conversation and two other gentlemen, From a tomb near Luoyang., Henan
province, Eastern Han dynasty (25–220 AD). Source: Wikimedia Commons

In the fi h Century B.C., Polykleitos, who was one of the most

prominent sculptor of the me, wrote the Kanon (The rule), in which he
theorized the anatomical propor ons for a perfectly balanced human body.
We have few original quotes from
his treaty, but the exis ng ones
underline the a en on to the
‘‘mimesis’’ (imita on) that, even if,
differently from Chinese ancient
pain ng, it tends to a superhuman
perfec on, seeks the outer
characteris cs of the human
being.
Copy of the Doryphorus by Polykleitos,
II – I sec. B.C. Na onal Archaeological
Museum, Naples Marble,
Height: 212 cm Source: Wikimedia Commos

But this was not enough to sa sfy the need of a certain public as Plato
and Huainanzi, who witness:

‘‘The painted creatures rise up as living beings, but, if you ask them
5
something, they solemnly preserve an absolute silence’’ .
 ‘‘As far as the depic on of the appearance of a subject is concerned, the
me culous research of the resemblance incurs in an unsuccessful work. The
6
work lacks the a rac on of the beauty of vitality’’ .

What they were expec ng was something more than a mere ar ficial
imita on of the shapes of the outer world. An answer to this need was
given by two key figures, two geniuses who, through their contribu on,
allowed the thought of both cultures to boost and reach a peak of
sophis ca on. One of them is a ‘‘street’’ philosopher who could operate in
every place and with every kind of people and whom everyone could find
and ques on everything: Socrates. The other one is a great ar st, arts cri c
and poet whose charge was in the court, but whose heart, he lyrically says,
resided between mountains and rivers: Gu Kaizhi (顾恺之).

Let’s now first focus on four significant artworks which are relevant for
our purpose: the Talos krater, the copy of Alexander the Great’s head by
Lysippus, and the two Song dynasty copies of the ‘‘Pain ng of the poem on
the Nymph of the Luo river’’ (洛神赋图).

The Talos Krater, on display in Ja a Archaeological Museum in Ruvo di

Puglia (Apulia, Italy) is a work by the so called Talos painter. He is an A c
7
vase painter ac ve during the last twenty five years of the V Century b.C. .
In its main scene, the krater represents the death of Talos, bronze guardian
of Crete, killed by the Argonauts. The central figure is Talos who is the only
figure painted in shades of white and yellow and on his two sides there are
the two Dioscures, Castor and Pollux, authors of the murder, whose color is
reddish due to the color of the terraco a, a typical case in Greek V Century
po ery. On the le side of the three characters there’s Medea who helped
the Dioscures to defeat Talos through her sorcery. On the right side,
Poseidon and Amphitrite, marine divini es worshipped in Crete, witness the
8
scene . Talos, won, lets himself fall down in the hands of the two Dioscures.
 As it was
typical of the
iconographie
s of heros, he
is painted
naked. His
face and in
par cular his
eyes a ract
the a en on
of the
spectator for
their
expressivity,
they seem to
tell the viewer about his unhappy des ny of death, but they are s ll calm,
maybe because he couldn’t any be er than defending his island which was
his life task and they look upward to the sky maybe in search for some help.
All this occurs just before his last breath.
Talos painter, Talos Krater, V – IV sec. B.C. Ja a Archaeological
Museum, Ruvo di Puglia, Italy Source: Wikimedia commons

Detail of the Talos Krater

Looking at the copy of Alexander the Great’s portrait by Lysippos

(390/385 b.C. – 306 b.C.), we can no ce a handsome, heavy-featured young
man with short tousled hair. As a whole, the face conveys vigor. Alexander,
fixing his sight towards the void and his forehead being slightly furrowed in
concentra on, expresses his medita ve moment.
Copy of Alexander the Great’s portrait, Lysippos, Marble, Istanbul Archaeological
Museum, Turkey, II sec. B.C. Source: Wikimedia commons
 As for the ‘‘Pain ng of the poem on
the Nymph of the Luo river’’ by Gu Kaizhi,
since unfortunately the original does not
exist anymore, I will discuss two Song
dynasty copies: one is stored in the
Liaoning Provincial Museum and the other
one in Beijing Palace Museum. Throughout
this long horizontal scroll, I will
focus on the scene of the
mee ng between Cao Zhi ( 曹
植) and the Goddess of the Luo
river (洛神).

Detail of a copy of the ‘‘Pain ng of the poem on the Nymph of the Luo river’’ by Gu Kaizhi,
Anonymous painter of the Song Dynasty, 27.1 x 572.8 cm
Beijing Palace Museum
Source: China online museum

Firstly it is crucial to say that the pain ng was inspired by a poem (赋 fu)
wri en by Cao Zhi (192 – 232 C.E.), who was in first person in the poem.
This poem, in addi on, represents for us, later viewers, a detailed
descrip on of the pain ng. The scene represents, from the right to the le ,
Cao Zhi and his entourage standing on the shore of a river, the Luo (洛). Cao
Zhi, with a parasol li ed over his head, holds two members of his entourage
in his hands and looks in front of him where the Nymph of the Luo river is
standing. The Nymph, whose hairstyle is finely and highly organized and
whose unique dress is wonderfully fluctua ng, holds a colorful flag topped
with a yak’s tail hair and looks on her turn to Cao Zhi. Around her there are
a wandering dragon, two flying geese, a moon both visible and hidden by
the surrounding clouds, a rising sun with pink clouds and some lotus
flowers. All these details are metaphors of her appearance. Besides showing
the aspect of the characters, most importantly, the two pain ngs point out
their inner world.
Detail of the Liaoning Museum copy, The central character is Cao Zhi

Due to the accuracy of the expression of the inner world of each

character, I chose to analyze the Cao Zhi pictured in the Liaoning provincial
museum copy and the Nymph painted in the Beijing Palace museum copy.
The Cao Zhi we see in the Liaoning

provincial museum version is absorbed by the view of the Nymph and

nothing else occupies his mind, his eyes are gazing only at her. This portrait
corresponds to the reac on Cao Zhi has when he watches the Nymph: ‘‘my
spirit fled away and my soul went in a trance, suddenly my thoughts
 9
dispersed’’ . Focusing the Nymph of the Luo river, it’s harder to seize her
inner world because she’s the object of Cao Zhi’s admira on, hence he only
describes her appearance, but we can see her spirit through her eyes,
10
‘‘brilliant’’ and which are ‘‘good in caring’’ as noted by Cao Zhi and
carefully represented by the painter. Furthermore Cao Zhi says that ‘‘her
bearing is calm and her body at ease, her feelings are tender and her
11
a tude graceful, her words are appropriate and admirable’’ and what we
see in the scroll is a quiet, relaxed and graceful woman, her sight is adorable
and she displays a rare restraint.
Detail of the Beijing Palace Museum copy, The character is the Nymph of the Luo river

All these four artworks are an excellent product of the two highly
sophis cated civiliza ons. Apart from the high level techniques of the
ar sts, the real beauty of these works is conveyed by the deeper
expressivity of the subjects. But this is different from the ar s c produc on
of the previous Centuries. In order to explain this shi in taste I have to
reconnect the thread of the disserta on with the already men oned
revolu onary personali es: Socrates and Gu Kaizhi.

Amongst these two geniuses’ successful outcome, one that resulted

of meless value is the focus on the soul applied to the arts field which
turned out to be a revolu on.
12
‘‘Express the soul through shapes’’

wrote Gu Kaizhi in his ‘‘apprecia on of famous pain ngs of Wei and Jin
dynas es’’ (魏晋胜流画赞 weijin shengliu hua zan).
13
‘‘…make likeness of the deeds of the soul by means of the form’’
recorded Xenophon in his ‘Memorabilia’ describing Socrates having a
conversa on with a sculptor. These two sentences best summarize the
revolu on these two personali es brought about in their cultures. I will
explain these two sentences by analyzing two key words: form and soul.

In the same chapter in which Socrates says the just quoted sentence,
he is seen talking first with the famous painter Parrasius. The philosopher
shows him the possibility to express a passion through the eyes, the facial
expressions and the posture just a er Parrasius told him that it was not
possible to represent them since they are unseen. In another moment, s ll
14
recorded in the same chapter, Socrates visited Cleiton and asked him
about his technique which the sculptor explains to be consis ng in the
model based on the a en on to the likeness of the forms and movements
of the body. Since his subjects were mostly athletes, Socrates suggests him
to look into the passion of the ac ng bodies and their likeness, in this
manner he would be able to sculpt the threatening eyes of those who are
15
figh ng or the delighted look of a winner . In this way we can no ce the
importance that Socrates gives to the sight, to the face and to the body as
effec ve means to express the soul. Watching again the Talos Krater and
Alexander the Great’s head, we can dis nguish the care to these details and
their expression. The eyes, the face and the body were given a great
a en on by the ar st and catch the a en on of the viewer.

While with Socrates we have to extract the details of his thoughts by

the dialogues recorded by his disciples, Gu Kaizhi le us a methodical
explana on of his thought in three books. Buddhist classics, which played a
relevant influence on Gu Kaizhi, point out ‘‘six grasps’’ (六识 liu shi) which
are the eyes (眼 yan), the nose(鼻 bi), the ears(耳 er), the tongue(舌 she),
16
the body(身 shen) and the thuht (意 yi) . They are the ways to know the
outer world and at the same me they can be the subjects to be known.
Between these grasps, as Miss Luo Xiaoshan ( 罗 小 珊 ) demostrates in
17
‘‘Chinese thought and pain ng’’, the sight is more relevant . Gu kaizhi,
recalling the key role of the sight, writes in his ‘‘Apprecia on of famous
pain ngs of Wei and Jin dynas es’’ that pain ng the eyes is crucial because
if there is a li le mistake, the expression and the soul would be alterated.
Obviously Gu Kaizhi recognizes the importance of the other ‘‘grasps’’, but he
emphasizes the sight as Socrates did and as we s ll do today. The copies of
his pain ngs clearly reveal this aspect.

The cons tu on of the concept of the soul took both in Chinese and
Greek culture a certain me to be perceived, to evolve and to be set up and
Gu Kaizhi and Socrates place themselves in two different stages of this
development.

Socrates is, in the Greek world, the first philosopher to draw a en on

18
to the soul . ‘‘Before him, no Greek mouth had pronounced this word in
19
this way’’ writes W. Jaeger in his Paideia . What we call ‘‘soul’’ today, the
Athenian philosopher called it ‘‘psyché’’ using an old term which had an
indis nct meaning. Homer talks about the psyché more as ghosts which
20
disappear if someone tries to touch them . Socrates’ concep on of the
21
psyché was simple: it consisted in the interior world of the man , seat of
22
the normal intelligence and of the character .

‘‘ You, good man, since you are Athenian, ci zen of the biggest and most
famous Polis for power and wisdom, don’t you feel ashamed in taking care
of wealth, to gain as much as possible, and in taking care of fame and honor
and instead you don’t take care and think about the wisdom, the truth and
23
your soul so that this becomes good as much as possible?’’
Socrates believed that the soul was the most important part of the human
being and believed that its care lead to the knowledge of the deep human
24
nature , based on the relevance he gives to the soul, he suggests Parrasius
and Cleiton to express it in their works.

As for Gu Kaizhi, he lives in a period, the Jin dynasty (晋朝 jinchao), in

which the concept of the soul had already permeated Chinese thought a er
the influence of Buddhism and the media on of Chinese local philosophies,
par cularly the Xuanxue (玄学). I argue here that Gu Kaizhi, in his theory of
the expression of the soul ( 以 形 传 神 ), conceives the soul as ‘‘individual
25
self’’ (个别自我 gebie ziwo) , being the individual self perceived as agent
of a mental percep on (感知), as Mr Lao Siguang (劳思光) refers to it. This
mental percep on is otherwise known in the Buddhist classics as ‘‘Shishen’’
26
(识神) .

In order to really get the meaning of the individual self we have to see
the Shishen by analyzing the two components of the word. Referring to Mr.
Jin Guantao’s (金观涛) fourth talk in the book ‘‘Discussions on the history of
Chinese thought’’, the meaning of Shi ( 识 ) is ‘‘cogni on’’ ( 认 知 renzhi)
consis ng of consciousness (知感 zhigan) and discernment (分而知 fen er
zhi).

Speaking of the view of the Shen ( 神 ), I think that Gu Kaizhi is

influenced by the thought of one of his most influent contemporaries,
whose theories and books Gu Kaizhi most likely came in touch with: Hui
Yuan (慧远 334 - 416). In his view, the Shen is inex nguishable, but most
27
importantly for our aim, it is the root of the feelings ( 情 qing) . Hence,
when it comes to paint, Gu Kaizhi expresses the cogni on and the feelings
of the subject, as rooted from his soul. I would like to link this with the
words which Yu Jianhua (俞剑华), Luo Shuzi (罗尗子) and Wen Zhaotong
(温肇桐) point out in ‘‘Materials to discuss Gu Kaizhi’’ (顾恺之研究资料).
They argue that for Gu Kaizhi a good figure pain ng needs to accomplish
both the representa on of the specific iden ty of a person (related to the
social class) in his specific historical background and the depic on of the
28
individual character . These two elements can be seen as two different
29
things, but they are always in a closely linked rela on .

We can now match the just men oned ‘depic on of the individual
character’ to the previously men oned Shishen ( 识 神 ). In fact, between
these aesthe c requirements, Gu Kaizhi stresses more relevance to the
emo onal one. In the se ng up of the pain ng he makes a great effort to
leave his own thoughts and enter the thoughts of the painted subject to
30
express his feelings ( 迁 想 妙 得 qing xiang miao de) which become the
center of the a en on and the beauty of the pain ng.

Eventually we can observe that Socrates and Gu Kaizhi live in two

completely different places and environments, during a completely different
historical period and under the influence of different philosophies and
religions. But, concerning the object of this disserta on, are they not
focused on the same subject? Are they not careful on the same details? Are
they not aiming at the same philosophical and ar s c research? I firmly
think they are. Besides the shapes that Chinese and Greek culture have
contoured and developed, the heart of the beauty which these two
geniuses point out and elevate as aesthe c canon is the human being and
his universal beauty.

Davide Carnicella
Biblography

A.E. Taylor, Socrate, Florence, 1952.

Cao Zhi, the nymph of the Luo River.

Editors of Phaidon, 30.000 years of art, London, New York, Phaidon Press,2007.

Francesco Sarri, Socrate e la genesi storica dell’idea occidentale di anima, Milan, 1975.

Huai Nanzi, Shuo shan xun.

Jin Guantao, Mao Jianbo, Chinese thought and pain ng (4 volume), Hangzhou, China Academy of art
press, 2015.

Li Yanglin, Gu Kaizhi, Beijing, China Renmin University press, 2003.

Paul Johnson, Socrates, Viking Adult press, 2011.

Plato, Phaedrus.

Socrates’ Apology.

Treccani Encyclopedia under the heading ‘‘Pi ore di Talos’’.

W. Jaeger, Paideia,the forma on of the Greek man, vol. II, Florence, 1967.

Xenophon, Memorabilia.

Yu Jianhua , Luo Shuzi and Wen Zhaotong, Materials to discuss Gu Kaizhi, Beijing, People’s art press,
1962.
Note

[←1]
Li Yanglin, Gu Kaizhi, Beijing, China Renmin University press, 2003 p. 113.
[←2]
Li Yanglin, Gu Kaizhi, Beijing, China Renmin University press, 2003 p.113.
[←3]
Li Yanglin, Gu Kaizhi, Beijing, China Renmin University press, 2003 p. 114.
[←4]
Li Yanglin, Gu Kaizhi, Beijing, China Renmin University press, 2003 p. 114.
[←5]
Plato, Phaedrus, 275d.
[←6]
Huai Nanzi, Shuo shan xun (淮南子， 说山训). The extract says: “画西施之面，美而不可
悦；规孟贲之目，大而不可畏”.
[←7]
Treccani Encyclopedia under the heading ‘‘Pi ore di Talos’’.
[←8]
Editors of Phaidon, 30.000 years of art, London, New York, Phaidon Press,2007 p. 234
[←9]
Cao Zhi, the nymph of the Luo river, the passage recits: 精移神骇，忽焉思散。
[←10]
Cao Zhi, the nymph of the Luo river, the passage about the eyes recits: 明眸善睐。
[←11]
Cao Zhi, the nymph of the Luo river, the passage recits: 仪静体闲。柔情绰态，媚于语言。
[←12]
以形传神
[←13]
Xenophon, Memorabilia, Book III, Chapter 10.
[←14]
Some scholars believe him to be the more famous Polykleitos.
[←15]
Xenophon, Memorabilia, Book III, Chapter 10.
[←16]
Jin Guantao, Mao Jianbo, Chinese thought and pain ng (4 volume), Hangzhou, China Academy
of art press, 2015, p. 168.
[←17]
Jin Guantao, Mao Jianbo, Chinese thought and pain ng (4 volume), Hangzhou, China Academy
of art press, 2015, p. 169.
[←18]
A.E. Taylor, Socrate, Florence, 1952, p.98.
[←19]
W. Jaeger, Paideia,the forma on of the Greek man, vol. II, Florence, 1967, pp. 62-63.
[←20]
Paul Johnson, Socrates, Viking Adult press, 2011 p.111.
[←21]
Francesco Sarri, Socrate e la genesi storica dell’idea occidentale di anima, Milan, 1975.
[←22]
Taylor, Socrate, cit. in Francesco Sarri, Socrate e la genesi storica dell’idea occidentale di anima,
Milan, 1975.
[←23]
Socrates’ Apology, transla on by Giovanni Reale .
[←24]
Francesco Sarri, Socrate e la genesi storica dell’idea occidentale di anima, Milano, 1975.
[←25]
Jin Guantao, Mao Jianbo, Chinese thought and pain ng (4 volume), Hangzhou, China Academy
of art press, 2015, p. 166.
[←26]
Jin Guantao, Mao Jianbo, Chinese thought and pain ng (4 volume), Hangzhou, China Academy
of art press, 2015, p.171.
[←27]
Jin Guantao, Mao Jianbo, Chinese thought and pain ng (4 volume), Hangzhou, China Academy
of art press, 2015, p.164.
[←28]
Yu Jianhua , Luo Shuzi and Wen Zhaotong, Materials to discuss Gu Kaizhi, Beijing, People’s art
press, 1962, pp. 10-11.
[←29]
Yu Jianhua , Luo Shuzi and Wen Zhaotong, Materials to discuss Gu Kaizhi, Beijing, People’s art
press, 1962, pp. 10-11.
[←30]
Yu Jianhua , Luo Shuzi and Wen Zhaotong, Materials to discuss Gu Kaizhi, Beijing, People’s art
press, 1962, p. 11.