Plato and Aristotle

Plato's Theory of Mimesis (Imitation)

Plato, a towering figure in ancient Greek philosophy, approached art and literature through the lens of his broader philosophical system, particularly his Theory of Forms. For Plato, the physical world we perceive is merely a shadow or imperfect copy of a higher, eternal, and perfect realm of Forms. True knowledge, for Plato, lies in understanding these Forms.

In his seminal work, the Republic, Plato discusses his views on poetry and art, primarily through the character of Socrates. He introduces the concept of mimesis, which translates to imitation or representation. For Plato, all art is essentially mimetic. This means that artists imitate or represent aspects of the physical world.

However, Plato viewed this imitation with suspicion. Since the physical world is already an imperfect copy of the Forms, any imitation of the physical world is, in essence, an imitation of an imitation. This places art at a significant remove from truth and reality. For example, a carpenter makes a bed (a physical object), and a painter paints a picture of that bed. The carpenter's bed is an imitation of the Form of "bed," and the painter's picture is an imitation of the carpenter's bed. Thus, the painter's work is twice removed from the truth.

Plato believed that art, by imitating the sensible world, appeals to the lower, irrational parts of the soul – the emotions and passions – rather than to reason. This can be dangerous because it can lead individuals astray from the pursuit of truth and virtue. He was particularly critical of poets who, he argued, did not possess true knowledge of the things they depicted but rather produced works based on inspiration or opinion, which could mislead the audience.

While Plato acknowledged the potential for art to provide pleasure, he argued that this pleasure is secondary to the pursuit of wisdom and moral improvement. He advocated for a form of censorship in his ideal state, suggesting that art should be carefully regulated to ensure it promotes moral virtue and contributes to the well-being of the citizens. Only poets who praised the gods and virtuous men, and whose works were beneficial to the state, would be allowed.

Plato's critique of art is deeply intertwined with his ethical and epistemological concerns. He saw art as a potential threat to the rational order of both the individual soul and the state, primarily because of its mimetic nature and its appeal to emotions over reason.

Plato's Theory of Inspiration

In his dialogue, the Ion, Plato presents a different perspective on artistic creation, focusing on the concept of divine inspiration. Here, Socrates converses with Ion, a rhapsode (a performer of epic poetry), who claims to be able to speak eloquently about Homer.

Plato, through Socrates, argues that poets and artists do not create their works out of skill or knowledge in the way a craftsman does. Instead, they are possessed by a divine madness or a form of inspiration that comes from the gods. The poet is like a magnet or a chain, where the Muse is the first link, the poet is the second, and the performer (like Ion) and the audience are subsequent links.

This inspiration is not a rational process but a kind of frenzy or enthusiasm. The poet, in this state, is merely a mouthpiece for the gods, unable to fully explain the source or meaning of their own creations. Ion, for instance, can recite Homer beautifully and talk about it, but he cannot explain the art or science of warfare or charioteering, which Homer describes in detail. This suggests that his understanding is derived from divine inspiration rather than genuine expertise.

This theory of inspiration, while seeming to elevate the status of the artist by linking them to the divine, paradoxically reinforces Plato's suspicion of art. If artists are merely channels for divine utterances, they lack true knowledge and understanding of their craft or its subject matter. Their works, therefore, cannot be trusted as sources of truth or wisdom, as they are not grounded in reason or genuine expertise.

This dual perspective – art as imitation of an imperfect reality and art as divine inspiration devoid of true knowledge – forms the core of Plato's critical stance on literature and the arts.

Aristotle's Defense of Poetry

Aristotle, Plato's most famous student, offered a significantly different and more positive view of poetry and art in his Poetics. While he agreed with Plato that poetry is a form of mimesis (imitation), he saw this imitation not as a deficiency but as a fundamental human characteristic and a source of pleasure and knowledge.

Aristotle argued that humans are naturally inclined to imitate from childhood. This instinct for imitation is one of the things that distinguishes humans and is linked to our capacity for learning. Through imitation, we learn about the world and gain understanding. Therefore, poetry, as an imitative art, is a natural and valuable human activity.

Unlike Plato, who saw poetry as twice removed from truth, Aristotle considered poetry to be more philosophical and serious than history. He reasoned that history recounts particular events that have happened, while poetry deals with universal truths – what might happen or what is probable or necessary. A poet, by creating believable characters and plausible plots, can reveal universal aspects of human nature and experience that history, with its focus on specific, contingent events, might miss.

Aristotle's most significant contribution to literary criticism is his analysis of tragedy. He defined tragedy as "an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude; in language embellished with each kind of artistic ornament, the several kinds being found in the several parts of the play; in the form of action, not of narrative; through pity and fear effecting the proper catharsis of these emotions."

The concept of catharsis is central to Aristotle's theory. He believed that tragedy, by presenting scenes that evoke pity and fear in the audience, provides a healthy release or purgation of these emotions. Experiencing these emotions in a controlled, artistic context allows the audience to cleanse themselves of them, leading to a form of emotional and psychological equilibrium. This is a stark contrast to Plato's view that such emotions stirred by art are dangerous.

Aristotle also emphasized the importance of plot (mythos) in tragedy, considering it the "soul" of the play. He outlined the elements of a good plot, including unity of action, a clear beginning, middle, and end, and the presence of reversal (peripeteia) and recognition (anagnorisis), which create suspense and emotional impact. Character (ethos) and thought (dianoia) are also important, but they serve the plot. Diction (lexis) and spectacle (opsis) are considered less crucial than plot and character.

Aristotle's approach is more empirical and analytical than Plato's. He examines how poetry works, what makes it effective, and its potential benefits, rather than primarily focusing on its metaphysical status or its potential dangers. He saw poetry not as a threat to reason but as a source of pleasure, learning, and emotional health.

Key Differences and Contributions

The divergence between Plato and Aristotle on the nature and value of art and literature is one of the most fundamental debates in Western literary criticism.

Plato's Contributions and Criticisms:

• Theory of Forms: Art is an imitation of an imitation, thus twice removed from truth.
• Critique of Emotion: Art appeals to the irrational part of the soul, potentially corrupting morals.
• Emphasis on Reason: Advocated for art that promotes virtue and is controlled by reason.
• Censorship: Believed art should be regulated for the good of the state.
• Theory of Inspiration: Artists are divinely inspired but lack true knowledge.

Aristotle's Contributions and Defense:

• Mimesis as Natural: Imitation is a natural human instinct and a source of learning and pleasure.
• Poetry as Philosophical: Poetry deals with universals and is more profound than history.
• Catharsis: Tragedy provides a healthy emotional release (purgation of pity and fear).
• Formal Analysis: Emphasized the structure of poetry, especially plot, character, and thought.
• Empirical Approach: Focused on the function and effect of art.

Plato's Influence on Literary Criticism

Plato's critique, despite its negative stance on art, laid the groundwork for much subsequent literary criticism. His emphasis on the relationship between art, truth, and morality became a recurring theme. Critics have often grappled with the question of whether art should aim for verisimilitude (likeness to reality), or whether it can transcend the physical world to reveal deeper truths. His ideas about censorship and the social function of art also continue to resonate in discussions about the impact of media and cultural products.

The concept of the artist as a divinely inspired genius, even if viewed critically by Plato, evolved into the Romantic notion of the poet as a visionary figure, albeit one whose vision was often considered authentic rather than merely imitative. Plato's suspicion of the emotional power of art also foreshadowed later anxieties about the potential for literature and other art forms to manipulate or corrupt audiences.

Aristotle's Influence on Literary Criticism

Aristotle's Poetics is arguably the single most influential work in the history of literary criticism. His formal approach, focusing on the internal structure and elements of a literary work, became the foundation for formalist criticism, which dominated literary studies for centuries.

His detailed analysis of tragedy, including concepts like plot, character, catharsis, peripeteia, and anagnorisis, provided a vocabulary and framework for understanding dramatic literature that is still used today. The idea that art can provide a valuable form of knowledge and emotional experience, rather than just being a dangerous imitation, opened the door for a more positive and analytical engagement with literature.

Aristotle's distinction between poetry and history, emphasizing poetry's focus on universals, also had a profound impact on how literature was understood and valued. It established literature as an autonomous field of inquiry capable of revealing truths about the human condition in a way that empirical observation or historical reporting could not.

The emphasis on structure and form in Aristotle's work influenced not only the study of drama but also the understanding of epic poetry and, by extension, other literary genres. His analytical method encouraged critics to look closely at the text itself, dissecting its components to understand its overall effect and meaning. This analytical rigor became a hallmark of academic literary study.

In summary, Plato initiated the critical discourse by questioning art's relationship to truth and morality, while Aristotle provided a systematic defense and analysis of poetry, establishing many of the foundational concepts and methodologies that would shape literary criticism for millennia.