Platonic Parodies
by Eleanor Jones
The Internet is now riddled with spoofs and parodies of popular media. Humorous though they are, are they art? Furthermore, are they art by Plato’s standards? One may come closer to answers by delving into what a parody is, Plato’s three levels of creation, and what this ancient Grecian might have to say about musical parodies.
Wikipedia defines a musical parody as the changing or copying of existing (usually well known) musical ideas or lyrics, or the copying of the peculiar style of a composer or artist, mostly with the intention of humor. To put it simply, one can divide parody songs into two different sects. There are songs that use existing tunes but replace the original words with those of an unrelated topic, and songs whose lyrics mock the musician’s style. One of the most well-known parody artists is Weird Al Yankovic whose creations are often more noted than the originals. Unfortunately many song spoofs are viewed as offensive attacks on the original artist, but often with good reason. Let us see what a professional’s views are.
In the extract “Art and Imitation” from Plato’s Republic he philosophizes that there are three levels of creation using the example of a bed. There is a god that makes the form or concept of the bed, and then there is the man that creates a physical bed, and finally the man that paints a simple imitation of a bed. Therefore the painting, in Plato’s eyes, is but a mere reflection- the farthest away from the truth. This painter also has to know very little about beds in order to paint one. He must plainly copy what he observes, not create it. That being said, what about something that’s purpose is to directly mock a piece of art?
Plato obviously didn’t live to see the Doctor Who version of Ke$ha’s “Tik Tok”, but if he did what would he think? He most likely would not believe musical parodies to be art. You can very easily replace the bed with music in Plato’s example. If a god has created the form of music, then a musician writes a song, and finally some rando YouTuber spoofs the song; it is nowhere near original. However, Plato never mentions what he would think if the painter were to put their own twist on their painting of the bed. Perhaps because said YouTuber is putting their own style into the parody they aren’t simple mirrors. On the other hand, Plato might have found parodies completely unoriginal and inartistic. Maybe they would have been added on to a fourth even lower level of imitation. However, it need not be debated that the career of a parody musician lacks originality.
So in conclusion, musical parodies are entertaining mockeries of songs. Plato finds paintings of objects to be mere imitations of the original concepts. Finally, he actually might have had to bend his philosophies on art for spoof songs. So, probably nothing is an original piece of art and creativity.
Wikipedia defines a musical parody as the changing or copying of existing (usually well known) musical ideas or lyrics, or the copying of the peculiar style of a composer or artist, mostly with the intention of humor. To put it simply, one can divide parody songs into two different sects. There are songs that use existing tunes but replace the original words with those of an unrelated topic, and songs whose lyrics mock the musician’s style. One of the most well-known parody artists is Weird Al Yankovic whose creations are often more noted than the originals. Unfortunately many song spoofs are viewed as offensive attacks on the original artist, but often with good reason. Let us see what a professional’s views are.
In the extract “Art and Imitation” from Plato’s Republic he philosophizes that there are three levels of creation using the example of a bed. There is a god that makes the form or concept of the bed, and then there is the man that creates a physical bed, and finally the man that paints a simple imitation of a bed. Therefore the painting, in Plato’s eyes, is but a mere reflection- the farthest away from the truth. This painter also has to know very little about beds in order to paint one. He must plainly copy what he observes, not create it. That being said, what about something that’s purpose is to directly mock a piece of art?
Plato obviously didn’t live to see the Doctor Who version of Ke$ha’s “Tik Tok”, but if he did what would he think? He most likely would not believe musical parodies to be art. You can very easily replace the bed with music in Plato’s example. If a god has created the form of music, then a musician writes a song, and finally some rando YouTuber spoofs the song; it is nowhere near original. However, Plato never mentions what he would think if the painter were to put their own twist on their painting of the bed. Perhaps because said YouTuber is putting their own style into the parody they aren’t simple mirrors. On the other hand, Plato might have found parodies completely unoriginal and inartistic. Maybe they would have been added on to a fourth even lower level of imitation. However, it need not be debated that the career of a parody musician lacks originality.
So in conclusion, musical parodies are entertaining mockeries of songs. Plato finds paintings of objects to be mere imitations of the original concepts. Finally, he actually might have had to bend his philosophies on art for spoof songs. So, probably nothing is an original piece of art and creativity.