Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Reflections about plato's republic
Plato's idea of art
Plato's view on art
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Reflections about plato's republic
In Plato’s Republic, we are given insight on how Plato perceives imitation on art. Plato mentions that dim eyes often see things before sharp ones. (596a) This we can interpret as a normal person being able to see things as they are rather than someone who is more knowledgeable and more analytical. To be able to see things as they are is a better approach in understanding imitation. Too much analysing can make the person overlook what is being seen; the person will end up complicating the issue.
In part 10 of his book, it enables us to see how Socrates feels about artists—specifically how their creations are stretched from the truth. Art manipulates the truth which pushes it to the area of becoming what is real. For instance, there is one
…show more content…
Along with artists, Plato aims to dispel poets as well. The only thing poets can do is imitate imitations of the truth. They corrupt everyone who reads and listens to their work being that they are twice removed from the area of becoming. If anyone were to claim or is said to know everything, they must be deceiving the people and be an imitator. One must closely examine whether to see if what they say is true or if it is not. Homer, for example, spoke ample amount about governing and war yet Socrates uncovers that he never actually governed and was never a leader for any war. If Homer had known much about these subjects as he had claimed to when he mentioned them, he much rather would have participated in them, leaving behind deeds that he could be admired for instead of just simply talking about them. Consequently, we can conclude that Homer was just a poetic imitator who actually did not know the truth or comprehend the reality but only of the …show more content…
They are limited to the ideas and phantom figures but not what really exists in the physical world. The reason being that they are only limited to the ideas and figures is due to the fact they do not possess the sufficient level of knowledge to see what is beyond the little they know. They say poets are all knowing because to make a well written piece, one must know what he is writing about. Hence, we need to decide if what they’re saying is true or if they have been deceived, making it to where they are unable to see that the poet’s work is is three times removed from the truth since they are not real. (598e) Moreover, poetry should be banished according to Socrates for the reason that no poet should be allowed to write on ideas or subjects that they do not have any experience or knowledge. Poets are able to imitate things like peace and vibrancy to display their creations charm. Although what they lack is substance. If a poem was removed of its charm then it would resemble a person who is no longer youthful.
Poets present scenes that are so far removed from the truth, turning them away from what is the most real to what is the least real. These images that they portray do not imitate the morality of the soul. The logical part of the soul is not easy to understand or imitate because it is solid and tranquil. The thing that poets do is imitating the worst parts, the tendencies that make characters lively
Each literary work portrays something different, leaving a unique impression on all who read that piece of writing. Some poems or stories make one feel happy, while others are more solemn. This has very much to do with what the author is talking about in his or her writing, leaving a bit of their heart and soul in the work. F. Scott Fitzgerald, when writing The Great Gatsby, wrote about the real world, yet he didn’t paint a rosy picture for the reader. The same can be said about T.S. Eliot, whose poem “The Lovesong of J. Alfred Prufrock,” presents his interpretation of hell. Both pieces of writing have many similarities, but the most similar of them all is the tone of each one.
In today’s modern view, poetry has become more than just paragraphs that rhyme at the end of each sentence. If the reader has an open mind and the ability to read in between the lines, they discover more than they have bargained for. Some poems might have stories of suffering or abuse, while others contain happy times and great joy. Regardless of what the poems contains, all poems display an expression. That very moment when the writer begins his mental journey with that pen and paper is where all feelings are let out. As poetry is continues to be written, the reader begins to see patterns within each poem. On the other hand, poems have nothing at all in common with one another. A good example of this is in two poems by a famous writer by the name of Langston Hughes. A well-known writer that still gets credit today for pomes like “ Theme for English B” and “Let American be American Again.”
Despite the beauty described in the first few stanzas of the poem, it was the feeling of doubt and pondering that approached at the end of the poem that truly was the most thought provoking. Instead of just writing of beauty, Poets must realize that they may be leading people to false ideals, and in doing so that they may actually be causing individuals to believe in something that is nothing more than a dream. This realization makes the image of the questioning poet by far the most important in the piece.
Through this sympathetic faculty, a writer is able to give flesh, authenticity and a genuine perspective to the imagined. It is only in this manner that the goal of creating living beings may be realized. Anything short of this becomes an exercise in image and in Kundera’s words, produces an immoral novel (3). The antithesis of liv... ...
There appears to be an unnatural and unfounded fascination with the alleged “works” of Socrates. Perhaps that it is simply that the absolutist ideals of philosophers such as Plato and Socrates do not appeal to the post-modern, politically correct, wishy washy, materialistic reader. It is more likely, however, that the problems posed by the philosophy itself and its surrounding circumstances outweigh the insight and philosophical ingenuity.
Gregory Vlastos commented in his book Socrates: The Ironist and Moral Philosopher, “Such is his strangeness that you will search and search among those living now and among men of the past, and never come close to what he is himself and to the things he says.” (Vlastos). Gregory makes an important point; although studying Plato gives us a glimpse of Socrates, it only gives a glimpse of him through Plato’s eyes. We can study this text and others and never understand exactly who this man is. Even if we had writings of Socrates’s own hands it would be difficult to understand this complicated man. On the other hand the writings we do have, including the
The essays used in this book have been chosen by Harold Bloom, being that they are still by different essayists than the last two sources mentioned and considering Bloom is not one of them, it is still not bias. This source shed some light on the context of the two poems that were analyzed, but minimal observations on the poem itself and its correlation to the themes. Given this, there was only bare to little use of this secondary source.
Despite the differences between the characters in the poems, I will also go on to say how the preoccupation with death and violence all seem to stem from the apparently unstable minds of the characters; from the instability brought on by varying emotions such as grief, jealousy, resentment, guilt and madness, and the fact that these emotions may lead to paranoia.
Books III and X contain information on art as an imitation of real things. “Imitation, we say, imitates human beings performing forced or voluntary actions, and, as a result of the action, supposing themselves to have done well or badly, and in all of this experiencing pain or enjoyment” (287). Plato also describes art as the imitation of real things as a copy of an object. A painter paints a picture of a couch. The couch in the painting looks the
...images, but with extremely unlike moods. Society often depicts many things in a different light. They may describe something as the new and adventurous thing everybody should try, but doesn’t include the effects. Often people are tricked by their means of persuasion without acknowledging the facts. The key thing these poets were trying to explain was that there is no way of knowing how something will be unless you try it. They are not saying to go out and try everything but that you can’t believe everything that people say.
For some individuals, poetry is a form of freedom and expression. It is one of the many creative ways to release feelings of anger and happiness from the human mind. The intensity of every rhythm and word, and style of each poem allows readers to uncover deeper significance to the context. The rich variety achieved by mixing a combination of human imagination and reality to tell a story with deeper meaning is remarkable. This concept of combining poems and human imagination together was popularized by Edgar Allan Poe. Living an impoverished life, Poe penned stories of horror and mystery into collections of poems and short stories. He expressed his thoughts on paper with great thrill and excitement. Known for his wild imagination that included suspenseful, dark tales, he posed as a literary figure and inspired many across the world.
Restlessness is the main focus of Phillips’ article, it is the title of his article and in his opinion it is the reason why poems exist at all. “Poetry is the results of a generative restlessness of imagination… uncertainties become obsessions to be wrestled with, and with luck, the result is poetry…” (Phillips 132) Phillips, in summary of his article, claims uncertainties in life trouble our minds until the uncertainties become obsessions. We become restless in our quest to understand the uncertainties we face and by writing poems we can organize our thoughts and try to understand the things we do not. Phillips furthers his explains his claim by admitting “ I write poetry for the same reason that I read it, both as a way of being alive and as a way of trying to understand what it means—how it feels—to be alive.” (Phillips 133).
...human imagination and reality, the role of imagination in shaping that reality, and the role of the reader, as an observer as well as participant, in the understanding of poetry, of language shaping the world around him.
During the ancient times in Greece, Plato was the first human to document and criticize the existence of art and artists. He mentioned that human art was always in a form of a representation of something else. In one of Plato’s famous works, he demonstrates the idea of art is like an “imitation of nature” (Blocker 3). In other words, the purpose of art was to represent nature and nothing else. Art was not created for the sake of its own self nor was it created to appreciate its own beauty by any means. Instead, art, usually in forms of writings, paintings, or sculptures, was created to only to represent nature, Gods, emperors, families, or other important individuals. Furthermore, Plato had a very critical view towards the existence art in our society because art makes us more emotional, and our emotions lead to many errors about life. He believed it is our rational thinking, not our emotions or senses, which helps us und...
Poetry, with its focus on mimesis or imitation, has no moral value. While Plato sees reality as a shadow of a realm of pure Ideas (which in turn is copied by art), Aristotle sees reality as a process of partially realized forms moving towards their ideal realizations. Given this idea by Aristotle, the mimetic quality of art is redefined as the duplication of the living process of nature and its need to reach its potential form. Art, then, for Aristotle, does not become the enemy of society if the artist is loyal to the representation of the process of becoming in nature. Horace, like Aristotle and Plato, also brings to view a theory of poetry as mimesis.