SAAD MOHAMMED MUHASSIN, A1 MIMESIS

Introduction

Mimesis is one among the oldest terms known to mankind both in literary and artistic theory, which results in being the most fundamental concept known to us. It has influenced us greatly in our understanding of art and literature. We rely on the concept to an extent that we depend on it even though many of us have no knowledge on the concept of mimesis or its history. The term is most often but inadequately translated into English as “imitation”, to describe the relation between artistic images and reality. In simpler terms art is a copy of the real world. But this definition does not give a proper account of the scope of the very concept. According to the concept of mimesis, things such as art and literature are nothing but an imitation of the original. The term has been used extensively to describe the relationship between art and life.

Mimesis has been an issue of obsessive concern for the philosophers and artists of the Western world for thousands of years. The very concept of art it seems is inconceivable, without the theory of mimesis. The term was introduced into literary theory by the Greek philosopher Plato about two thousand years ago in his dialogue the Republic where he says that art is merely an imitation of something real. He says that art is “merely” an illusion which has to be distinguished from truth and nature. In fact the entire history of literary theory is filled with attempts to challenge, modify and defend the very definition of mimesis. One simply cannot grasp the concept of western theory of art and literature without having any knowledge of the theory of mimesis

Mimesis is not just a theory of art and images. From the very beginning mimesis has been used to connect between art and human behaviour and the society in which we interact. More recently, mimesis has been used for research in various disciplines namely psychology, anthropology, post colonial studies, political theory, educational theory, feminism, in addition to being used in literary and artistic theory and is even use in neo-Darwinian biological speculation. The word originally referred to physically mimicking or mimicking which was later brought on to the realms of artistic production by Plato and his student, Aristotle. According to them, the ability to create and be influenced by art is what makes us human beings. We can take the cases of how films, books, video-games influence both the young as well as the old. This phenomenon is called the ‘Werther effect’ by contemporary psychologists named after a novella by the German writer Johann Wolfgang van Goethe titled The Sorrows of Young Werther(1774). It is said that   many readers have tried to imitate the suicide of the titular hero. But recent experiments show that children are much better able to imitate live-actions than they see on television. Adults too tend to imitate as much as children imitate what they see around them. Despite this obvious, our everyday beliefs continue to be shaped by the ancient Greek notion of mimesis being something deep within the human nature and also influence our attitude towards art and literature.

The impossibility faced in the disentanglement of the aesthetic, social, and psychological meanings of mimesis from each other is a recurrent crux in the fields of literary and artistic history. Stephen Halliwell, the classics scholar had noted that historically art had been divided between two fundamental ideas based on the combined approaches of Plato and Aristotle. The first idea says that art reflects the world as it is. According to the idea, mimesis gives an almost accurate rendering of what goes on around us so it depends upon the reality that can be perceived and sensed by us in the material world. Therefore, as long as we perceive the world as it is around us, we would be having no problem in understanding whether an artistic or literary work shows reality as it is. The second idea defines art as a self contained ‘heterocosm’ which stimulates our way of understanding things around us. According to this idea mimesis does not reproduce reality as it actually is but instead gives a ‘lifelike’ simulation of it.  

Plato’s observations on Mimesis

The ancient Greek philosopher is perhaps the first person who spoke on the topic of mimesis. Although he referred to it many times in the course of his career, the most important references come in his dialogue the Republic, a work which dealt on a wide variety of subjects such as politics, art, and ethics. Plato not only comments on the concept of mimesis but declares art itself as mimetic, a representation of something else. Plato’s theory on mimesis which is complicated enough is made even more so as none of the utterances in this dialogue is uttered by him but by a figure called Socrates which may or may not be the historical figure. As a result we are never certain whether to take the comments seriously or ironically. Nevertheless, no discussion of art and representation can take place without coming into any contact with Plato’s definition. The history of artistic and literary theory begins with Plato’s account of mimesis.

The origin of the word mimesis can be traced back to the fifth century BCE, but the specific meaning remain the subject of scholarly dispute. Mimesis derives from the root mimos, which refers to both a person that imitates and a specific form of performance. Very little accounts are available on these performances. Aristotle in the Poetics mentions the mimes of Sophron and Xenarchus and describes it as a form of imitation that makes use of language alone. Other scattered references can be found in Greek writings but none of the examples survive to this day. Earlier scholars used to claim that they were religious rituals, but it is now widely accepted that the performances that Aristotle is referring to is a form of Sicilian drama in which the actors would depict certain scenes from the lives of the commoners. While it is hard to trace a clear development in the meaning of mimesis, it is clear that earlier it used to refer to the mimicry of living beings by bodily gesture or voice, and was rarely use in connection to art. But even in the earliest days mimesis did not simply refer to simply imitation but described the similarities between the ideal and real worlds.

Plato’s use of mimesis marks a turning point in the history of Greek ideas on art. Earlier in Greek culture, images were regarded as a personification of what they represent. For instance, the statues of Greek gods were regarded as the actual revelation of divinity rather than a mere representation. Plato was able to transform mimesis into a technical concept that defined the representation of the arts for years to come. Where traditional Greek thought considered images as embodiments, Plato groups’ images with phenomenon that were considered to be distinct before such as miming, pictures, shadows and dreams. They all are very different but resemble each other as they all resemble in some ways to real objects. The effect wax radical as art was no longer considered as a real thing but a mere appearance. It was no longer art or craft but an imitation of something else. Plato defines art as a recognizable category of human action but strips it of its independent reality.

In the Republic, Plato approaches mimesis in two different contexts. The first instances can be seen in books two and three and the second can be seen in book ten. Plato does not explicitly give a definition of art but mimesis is rather used while discussing broader topics such as politics, education, the ideal of justice and nature of philosophy. Mimesis is tied to the human nature and political life. The Republic, begins with the speaker Socrates proposing the construction of a new city so as to understand the constitution of the human soul. The city would be ruled by its wisest citizens (the philosophers), so that reason governs the soul.

Each individual in the city would be undertaking a task according to his/her nature and for the common good. They include farmers, weavers, carpenters, and so forth. They focus on their task alone and do not try to do anything else. Even when the economy diversifies, they will continue in their respective fields. But Socrates’ auditors believe that the people would resent not having certain luxuries and would soon reject the frugal lifestyle. At this moment Socrates proposes an idea of a ‘feverish city’ or the unhealthy city. This city is where the imitators, poets, actors, and craftsmen live.

The definition of artistic mimesis comes in book two. Having set out the basic structure of his ideal city, Socrates sets out a policy of education for the guardians of the city as well as the citizens. Socrates and his auditors’ think that the guardians who protect the city from outside threats can be a threat themselves as their aggression can also be turned inward and threaten the city. For this very reason Socrates outlines a course of education for the citizens. It is often said that Plato was against poetry and banished poets from his ideal republic, but when it comes to Socrates, he advocates the use of stories in education. He says that mothers and nurses should shape the minds of children in the same way their bodies are shaped by massages while infancy.

But the subject of the stories must be chosen carefully, as there would be a tendency to imitate both the good and bad elements of the story. Stories that contain ‘untrue’ accounts of the gods’ exploits must be censured and the guardians must be prevented from hearing it. The first story he says that must be excluded is the story of the strife within the divine family, Hesiod’s epic tale of how Uranus attempted to prevent the birth of his son Chronos, who in revenge castrated his father. Socrates notes:

it mustn’t be said that gods make war on gods, and plot against them, and have battles with them…provided that those who are going to guard the city for us must consider it most shameful to be easily angry with one another. (Plato, 1991:56)

In book three, Socrates continues his list of prohibited stories and behaviours. To ensure that the guardians are masculine enough to protect the city, any stories that describe about the sufferings in the Underworld, or heroes lamenting their fate, laughing uncontrollably or questioning their superiors were forbidden by Socrates. Even though stories are considered by Socrates to be playing an important role in the education of the young he still considered it as unnatural, unnecessary and false. He believes that mimesis is like a drug that is addictive which at the right amounts can be a bit useful, but when used excessively it can be extremely harmful.

Socrates divides narration into three categories – simple, mimetic and mixed. In simple narrative the narrator speaks in his/her voice without directly involving with the characters or the events that are taking place. This is the technique that is mostly used in historical narrative. In contrast mimetic narrative involve the narrator imitates the character in either voice or gesture as we can see in theatrical performances. Mixed style, is the style that we come across mostly in epics. Many commentators have noted that the platonic dialogues from the Republic are of mixed narrative style. In mixed narrative style at times poets would be speaking in their own voice and at times will be imitating the voice and gestures of other characters.

Socrates says that the guardians of the city must not be mimetic narrators, and if at all a context arises where they have to imitate it should be severely limited. He gives four reasons for the prohibition of imitations. Firstly, the mimetic narrator is a liar as he conceals his true personality behind that of the character which opens the possibility for deceptions. Secondly mimesis violates the principle of specialization. The only task of the guardian is to protect but if he begins to imitate others it is like performing other duties as well, which may lead to dereliction of duty. Thirdly, while imitating the imitator may stand a chance of being contaminated by the object of imitation. For this reason Socrates says that the guardians must only imitate good and courageous men and avoid the imitation of women, slaves, bad men, or the insane. The fourth reason and the reason for which Socrates especially prohibits imitation is because the imitator may certainly imbibe the characteristics of the imitated. In the end, Plato banishes all poets and artists from his ideal republic.

Conclusion

The term mimesis has long been used to refer to the relationship between the image and the real object. Plato, the most famous disciple of an equally famous philosopher, Socrates, was the first individual who expanded on the idea of mimesis. He connected it with politics, education, administration and art. In his the Republic, Plato creates an elaborate idea of an ideal republic where the roles of each individual is specified and set. The citizens are expected to work for the sake of common good and live a frugal life with bare necessities. The education is censured so as to be suitable for the young minds and it is the responsibility of the mothers’ and nurses to make sure that they are properly molded so as to become model citizens in the future. The republic would be governed by philosophers. All poets, artists, actors and craftsmen are banished from his republic.

Mimesis has evolved from the definition that was given to it by Plato and now is used in researches for a diverse range of disciplines of study. Although the definition of mimesis given by Plato is problematic modern literary theorists are forever indebted to him as it was resulted in the emergence of the Western school of thought.

Bibliography

Potolsky Mathew. Mimesis. New Delhi. Routledge. 2006
Plato. “Republic”. The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. Ed LeitchVincent. New York: W.W. Norton and Company Ltd.2001. Print.