ASSIGNMENT
ON
MIMESIS
SUBMITTED TO,
SUBMITTED BY,
Dr.
Shalini
Krishnaveni.U
Department
of English
I M A English and
And
Comparative Literature Comparative Literature
INTRODUCTION
Mimesis is the most fundamental, oldest, central term
in literary and artistic theory. Mimesis, ancient Greek term means “to imitate”
is a critical and philosophical term which contain imitation, mimicry, expression,
resemblance etc. The word is been used to describe the relation between the
original thing and the representation of that thing that is its imitation. The
notion of mimesis implies similarity between reality and representation.
Mimesis describes about the relationship between the
artistic images and reality. It says that art is a replica of reality. Mimesis
is always two sided good or bad, natural or unnatural, necessary or unnecessary.
In ancient Greece, mimesis is a creation of works of art with correspondence to
the physical world which can be seen as a mode for beauty, truth, and the good.
All art forms are not exactly mimetic, but for art in western culture is
unavoidable without the theory of mimesis.
Ancient Greek Philosopher Plato introduced the
literary theory term “mimesis” in his book “Republic”, art is something that
imitates reality. It is away from truth and nature and it’s an illusion.
Without the information about mimesis one cannot understand the western
theories of artistic representation. Mimesis has been always been theory of art
and images and it relates the idea of artistic representation to more general
claims about human social behaviour and the ways in which interaction with
others and our environment is done. In actual sense we can say that it is an
act of mimicking something. Plato and Aristotle brought about the common human
behaviour over to the realm of artistic representation: like the person who
imitates each others, art imitates the things in the world as the model of the form.
Since art imitates appearances which are not the actual reality it’s twice
removed from reality. So Plato says that art evoke passion and emotion of
people and it is not eternal.
Western
thought on art has been categorised fundamentally into two according to the
views of Plato and Aristotle. First one is that the art copies the material
reality outside the work and the second one is that the art is a separate world
and it stimulates a similar world. According to the first idea, mimesis gives
an accurate explanation of what it means, and thus depends for its creativity
on the reality of the material world. Like we perceive the world as it is real,
the work of art should also imitate it perfectly. According to the second one
imitation need not produce the actually what is but a similar type of it. If
the first one is said is the truth then the art is mirror of the world and if
the second one is right it is the mirror suggested not directly turned to the
audience and his or her beliefs. The first one about mimesis is difficult to
exhibit than the other especially in literary works, which cannot actually
mirror things. We can think the concept of mimesis in connection with human
psychology and culture.
The
mimetic effect of art is produced by the correct selection between work and the
vision of the spectators. Faithfulness to convention and not to the nature is
the source of mimesis. On conventional basis mimesis is dependent in social and
historical context in which a work is perceived and received.
Cultural
description of reality will not be the same everywhere and different historical
concepts will conventionally different over the periods, so a work of art which
would be intimate to one will be strange to another. Mimesis is of course a key
term for literary and artistic theory.
In
this paper I would like to include mainly the views put forward by Plato and
Aristotle on mimesis in their works Republic
and Poetics and views of Horace and
Longinus also. The theory of mimesis remains
strong in the works of Plato and Aristotle and the thinkers before twentieth
century wanted to reframe it in another way.
Both discussed mimesis distinction from reality but their views were
different. The theory of mimesis develops out to the looking back to the Greek
context. The mimetic quality of the history poses a conceptualisation problem. The
definition put by philosophers from Plato to the present is conflicting.
MIMESIS
PLATO’S APPROACH TOWARDS MIMESIS
The ancient Greek philosopher Plato gave the first
and most influential account of mimesis. He was the disciple of Socrates.
Socrates influenced Plato to establish Academy.
He discusses the topic in his dialogue Republic,
a work of literary theory published around 380 BCE. Plato redefines art as
mimetic, as a representation of something. According to Plato art, is a
different human product. Plato theory of mimesis is much complicated. In a way
the history of literary and artistic theory starts with the views put by Plato
of mimesis.
The word mimesis can be seen from the fifth century
BCE, it is Plato who used it and till that time it was rare word used. Mimesis
derives from the word mimos, imitates
in English mime. In Poetics Aristotle
mention mimesis as a form of ‘imitation by means of language alone’.
The French classic scholar Jean Pierre Vernant
commented on Plato’s use of the word mimesis as turning point in the history of
Greek ideas on art, it is an origin of new notion of image. Greek tradition
considers images as presentation of what they portray. Plato changes the
concept of mimesis into another technique that defines the art representation
as it is. Redefining the art is simply appearance, not the real thing.
Mimicking, pictures, shadows, mirror, dreams, emulation, reflection are all
accepted as a semblance. It is not creation; it is imitation of another thing.
Plato definition given is a recognisable side of human action.
Plato approaches mimesis in two contexts in the Republic: first in book two, three and
then in the tenth book. In both he does
not describe about the arts rather mimesis can be seen in the topic like
political organisation, education, justice, and philosophy. Mimesis is a strong
threat to justice and reason. Plato put mimesis to a vast question of human
nature and political life.
In Republic he
mainly explains about society, how it should be according to him. For him Republic is an ideal world – Utopia. In
book II he explains about education purpose. Education should give a healthy
body and healthy mind. For him children should be told stories which have some
moral values in it and which is useful for them, the other things should be
censored which is said in book III. In books II and III goes on an effect of
mimesis on children, the potential effect on adults. Book X these effects are
redefined on philosophical terms. The best republic and best life are governed
by reason but mimesis is contrary to reason, opposition between reason and
mimesis. Plato begins with the discussion of art in book X by challenging the
reality of mimesis, its status as a thing with unique properties. The
redefinition of truth has important consequences for the account of mimesis in
book X.
Art imitates appearances rather than
essences, according to Plato this world itself is a replica of an idea world so
it is twice removed from reality. He treats poetry as another form of illusion.
Thus, Plato concludes that art does not exclusively the eternal, but rather
arouses the passion and emotion among the people. So, he bans all poets from
the ideal republic. Mimesis is not serious; it is mere play rather than true
knowledge.
The analogy between art and optical
illusion, as we observe, he opines that mimesis splits the mind, setting the
claims the senses against reason. Somewhat similar is the condition occurs in
the context of tragedy. The division between action and emotion in tragedy is
similar to the division of senses and reason in the visual example. Tragedy
imitates human action as means of evoking emotion and so splits us against
ourselves. Tragedy motivates to involve in suffering. It is easier to imitate
violent action than anything rational. Like the painter imitates the things look
like rather than what it is, tragedy only shows what human character look like
from outside. Since tragedy appeal to emotion rather than reason it has far
reaching consequences for the audience. Tragedians bring only misery. Mimesis
creates sympathetic imitations in the viewer. We are now ruled by emotion
rather than by reason.
Plato’s most influential discussion of
mimesis comes in the dialogue on political and ethical theory. This has become
the matter of debate between the scholars. It is clear from the arguments that throughout
the work Plato wants his reader to reflect on the relation between mimesis and
politics. The discussion of mimesis in the Republic begins by defining and criticising
artistic mimesis, but end with considerations about the safety of the republic
and the regime of the soul. The word mimesis covers a striking range of human
activity for Plato. Both poetry and painting imitate the real: material objects
in painting and human action, emotion in poetry. But mimesis is also a part of
education. Children imitate the stories that they hear and this imitation
moulds their souls. By the end of book X, mimesis has come to characterize the
whole aesthetic response. From the creation to reception, art and influence are
defined by mimesis.
Plato offers certain clues throughout
the dialogue that his subject is superior to stories and pictures. Throughout
the dialogue Plato opposes mimesis to the ideals of masculinity or preference
to man. He associates it with women, children and the insane, all of whom were
excluded from Athenian political life. Tragedy finally encourages men to cry
like the women and the children. The examples show that the Plato’s theory is
very much a theory of political life. Mimesis is not only the concept of
stories and pictures but a problem for the nature of humanity itself.
ARISTOTLE’S APPROACH TOWARDS MIMESIS
Aristotle Poetics
is the most influential work of literary criticism in the western culture and
along with Plato’s Republic is a
foundational text for understanding of mimesis. In his Poetics Aristotle take the guidance of Plato in explaining all art
as mimesis. Very little is known about the original composition of the
treatise, but it is an incomplete fragmentations of lecture notes on tragic
drama and related subjects, written sometimes between 360 and 320 BCE.
Aristotle list of imitative art includes poetry,
painting, theatre, dance, music, sculpture, epic another kinds of narrative.
Aristotle then distinguishes between the various arts according to three varieties:
their media, objects, and manner of representation. Aristotle applies the notion
mimesis to art and sees the creation of art as a distinct and useful thing. He
explains the origin of art as natural, universal human desire to produce
imitations and obtain pleasure from this imitation. He does not confine mimesis
the artistic reproduction of real things, for tragedy and epic imitate actions
and experiences, but comedy mimics particular person.
Aristotle argues that the function of poet is not to
say about past, but say kind of things that happens in future, what is possible
in a way confirming probability and necessity. Aristotle focuses and says
mimetic art should not duplicate the reality perfectly, but rather must
reproduce the probable and similarly in a space of action and experience. He
says poetry philosophically superior to history; Poetry expresses the things
that we experience in our life.
Aristotle’s main subject is Greek Tragedy. He
borrows number formulations from Plato. Like Plato, Aristotle categorise all
the arts under a set of instruction of mimesis. His defence of mimesis is also
based on reason. Mimesis, for Aristotle is a real thing, which is suitable for
a critical analysis but its definition still relies. For Plato mimesis is the
mirror of something else and Aristotle defines mimesis as a craft which has its
own rules and goals. Aristotle says that he would treat poetry in itself and
not fundamentally as a replica of something else. Aristotle’s metaphor
emphasizes their similarity to natural objects.
Taking the case of drama he says that serious poet
wrote tragedy and while other kind of poet wrote comedies. Epic and tragedy
presents people as they are better than they are in life, whereas comedy
portrays them as worse. Aristotle primary analysed the mimesis put forward an
argument that art has certain nature of itself. He distinguishes art by the material
they come up with. Painting has colour, music melody and rhythm, dance rhythm
and poetry melody, language and rhythm. This art form is all mimetic in nature
but they use different kind of things. Instead of being a mere imitator, a true
artist should be a maker, craftsman.
Poetry is a kind of mimetic art still it has its own
correct method and goals is not just a congested version, science or
philosophy. Aristotle finds in the
changing things of mimesis a method of differentiating in the artistic styles
and genres. If mimesis can diverge from a strong recreation of life, then it
does far more than mirror the life. Manner of imitation is another difference
that marks the various mimetic arts.
Manner of imitation is an artistic choice. The manner of imitation he gives an
opinions, should be judged whether it is suitable to the nature of the
material. Success and failure of mimesis should be judged in terms of its
proper aims and methods, and not by a comparing with anything else.
For Aristotle, children’s imitation confirms the naturalness
of mimesis. We learn our basic lessons through imitation as humans are the most
imitative creature. Like children adults also derive pleasure and knowledge
from mimesis. Mimesis gives a kind of pleasure and learning. Mimesis concerns
in particular as well as universal. The concrete thing of mimesis is a section
of what makes it both potentially educational and enjoyable.
Although Aristotle borrows many things for
explaining mimesis from the Republic
but to a large extend complicates and revalue’s Plato’s ideas. We find to
revalue Plato’s judgements in Aristotle’s account of tragedy. Plato’s argument
is that tragedy dangerously deviate our emotion at the expense of our rational
requirements. For Aristotle, tragedy is rational one. Even tragic emotions,
Aristotle argues, can be made predictable and reasonable. According to
Aristotle, tragedy is an imitation of an action, which is complete and of
certain magnitude, in language embellished with each kind of artistic ornament,
several kinds being found in separate parts of the play; in the form of action
not narrative; through pity and fear effecting the purgation of these emotion. Definition
of tragedy on one level simply categorises tragedy as a form of mimesis: its
medium is language and rhythm – diction and song; its objects are men and
actions- plot, character and thought; and it’s performed rather than narrated-
spectacle. On another level, though the definition gives a comprehensive theory
about the nature of tragedy and rationality of mimesis.
For Aristotle, the mimetic work may contain its own
internal unity, a unity governed by necessity and reason, not by chance,
deception. The sense of unity we obtain from a mimetic work is explained by
unity of the thought process it inspires. Aristotle’s emphasis on the
rationality of mimesis explains his focus throughout the Poetics on plot. Plot
is not simply a mimesis of action but of action ordered and structured to
achieve certain ends. Unlike good tragic plots, such episodic plots are not unified
by probability and necessity and therefore do not appeal to reason. Mimesis, in
the other words, need not be true to fact to be pleasurable and persuasive.
Poetry approaches the status of philosophy for
Aristotle. He argues that poets are somewhat like philosophers; concern
themselves with universal principles of action and character and not with mere
fact. Poetry is more philosophical than history because it expresses the
universal by the ways of particular actions or character. History is restricted
as it is to repeating facts, comes intimate to Plato’s view of mimesis than
poetry does. Mimesis is defined not by its repetition of real but its quality
to bring out universal truth in particular character and action.
Aristotle extends his claim that mimesis is rational
to his describing of an event of the ways in which tragedy affects its
audience. For Aristotle, the emotion is the correct issue of tragic mimesis not
its problematic side effect. Tragic power is to bring up the emotions far from
being a threat to the audience is a natural and rational response to mimesis.
Aristotle finds two important tragic emotions: fear and pity. Mimesis allows us
a form of distance that enables rational reflection on even deviating visions
and tragedy in particular evokes emotional effects out of rational reflection
on course of human life. Aristotle details account how mimesis affects our
emotions stands in notable contrast to Plato’s doubt of all tragic emotion.
Although Aristotle list out Plato’s reduction of all art to mimesis, he also
gives what exist the most powerful defence of art in the history of literary
theory.
HORACE VIEWS ON MIMESIS
Horace (65-8 BC) is the well known member of circle
of poets patronized by the emperor Augustin. It is impossible to look at the
past of literary criticism without Ars
Poetica (Art of Poetry). Art of
Poetry originally it is written in verse (Hexameter verse) as letter (epistle)
to his friend. Ars Poetica is
Horace’s an advice giving letter in verse, to the Piso brother, in which he addresses
the problems of writing successful poetry. Unlike Aristotle and Plato, Horace
in the practical questions of how a poet may delight and instruct an
intelligent reader, than in defining what a poem is. Horace explains his notion
of accepted behaviour in terms of the proper balance between the didactic and
the entertaining, the correct regard for audience and the mimesis of nature and
the art.
Horace’s interpretation of literary imitation is no
expectation in dividing the intellectual spirit of culture of that age. Horace
converts the things of imitation from ideals or nature to the exemplary craftsmanship
of great persons such as Homer and other tragedians. In the Art of Poetry
Horace, unreserved portray his great love for Greek literature and anxious mind
to instruct his contemporaries. He put stress on literary tradition and
advocates the emulation of the ancient great persons. However the concept of
imitation of or reference to ancient masters denies a method to translate word
for word or the copying of what is understood but advocates a method of
infusing into the tradition one’s own invention, therefore it is a kind of
re-creation. Horace then explains in his view point on imitation and creation:
“he (Homer) leaves out what he is afraid he cannot make more illustrious with
his touch, and he invents, mixing fiction with truth, in such a way that the
beginning, middle, and end are all appropriate with each other”.
Horace has in Art of Poetry minimised the concept of
imitation to a technical process of either following the great method of the
old or making one’s own invention based on literary tradition and principles.
His principles for the young people who are the learners of the art of imitation
are basically concerned with ways or craftsmanship of writing, stressing art
over genius. All men are not equally talented so subject should be chosen
according to the strength of our writing. Horace says that to produce feelings
among the readers, the emotion should be first experienced by the writers
himself. So, we should think first before bringing out any piece of work.
LONGINUS VIEWS ON
MIMESIS
Longinus, being a Greek living in
the Roman period bears the sign of both the Roman Pragmatics and the depth of
Greek thought; the former in the sense that his view on literary imitation
serves first and the foremost purpose of how to achieve sublimit; latter in
sense that even if he also wish to learn ancient masters, he gives emphasis on
emulation on the spiritual level rather than in a technical sense, thus more
profound than Horace. Longinus concept of imitation is closely related to his
theory of sublimity, and can also be identified as a spiritual interaction with
the ancient great minds which involves in the subjectivity or imagination of
writer himself.
Longinus identifies the imitative
poet in the first stage which is to expose one’s soul spiritual influence of
the old masters. The second stage involves a process in which the poet subjectivity
or imagination is projected to the impression. Longinus explains the way to
sublime he approaches it from the perspective of meaning as imitation or mimesis.
Longinus agrees with Plat’s method to imitate Homer as a source. Longinus
method was to learn how to imitate a poet in the past and empathize the poet
himself to reach sublimity. Longinus proposes a dialogue between the imitative
poets and ancient great personalities.
Longinus put forward an opinion
that works of imitation should be kept and valued in a historical context, with
the past, the present, and the future interacting with one another in the same
area of activity. Mimesis or imitation is a good experience for the imitators
or competitor artist. Longinus explains different approaches to define sublime
and meaning as an imitation by the connection between Homer and Plato. In the part Longinus it should be first noted
that has been closely entertained with his theory on the sublime. His concept
of imitation is somewhat similar to Horace but concentrates on the spiritual
level, rather than the technical level. He shows how the effect of sublime has
on the reader.
CONCLUSION
By looking at the evolution on
the concept of mimesis from Plato to Longinus, it dealt with the opinions of
the four philosophers. Plato says that the world is the imitation of the ideal
world and the poets imitates the world which is not the reality. Aristotle
opines that imitation is a natural process and artistic production is distinct.
Horace stresses on imitating the ancient great personalities with their method
and art. Longinus acts to spiritual imitation and interaction with the ancient
masters.
In the history of literary
criticism mimesis is an important topic for discussion by many philosophers and
critics. Mimesis is the conceptual medium of western thinking about art, artistic,
audiences and about the relation to a vast area of human psychology and combining
life. The theory of mimesis is one among the most essential memes in the
history. Mimetic seeks biological origin and purpose in human knowledge and
creation of art.
A series of paths though the
complicated network of images, ideas and philosophical problems that make up the
western theory of mimesis. The four philosophers have made ways for their
successors and put a land mark in the field of literature as well as literary
theory. The entire history by the interpretation of literature and criticism
has changed and emerged with diverge possibilities put forward b the concept of
mimesis. Renaissance figures such as Petrarch, Sydney, and Erasmus are
influence by the concept of mimesis.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Potolsky, Mathew, Mimesis. Rouledge, Taylor and Francis
group: New York and
London. 2006. Web.
Wei, Chen and Xiong,
Wangmei. The Concept of Mimesis:
Evolution from Plato to Longinus.
Studies in Literature and Language. China. Vol
9, No 2, 31-36. 2014. Web.
Abhrams, M H
and Geoffrey Galt Harpham. A Glossary of Literary
Terms. Wadsworth:
Cengage Learning, 2012. Print.
Habib, M.A.R. Literary
Criticism from Plato to Present An Introduction. Oxford: Wiley-
Blackwell, 2011. Print.
https//Lucian.uchicago/edu/blogs/mediatheory/keywords/mimesis-2/
No comments:
Post a Comment