plato and the "art world"
by jacob noblett
“All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players.” The great William Shakespeare formed this incredible statement long ago. The simplicity of its language allows easy access into the secret worlds that are too often ignored within our minds. It picks, ever so gently, at our imaginations and desire to understand the rational world (through emotions). Yet long before there was Shakespeare, there was philosophy; Plato being a constituent.
Plato’s thoughts on art, especially drama and poetry, are less than flattering. Being a man of reason, Plato longs for self-control, self-possession and restraint in relation to emotions. In his view, institutions of drama (e.g. Broadway) are negative influences and ultimately are leading mankind away from true happiness. In modern times, this perspective is often seen as ridiculous and foolish. However, Plato recognizes something about art and its effects on humans. He believes that art plays on the baser part of the mind instead of challenging the mind. For example, a person may go to a play if they are sad in order to distract themselves. Instead of deliberating with oneself over internal issues through reason, the patron becomes captivated by imaginary characters and pretend situations. Plato notes this as a waste of time. This is not to say that Plato does not understand the purpose (or even the benefit) of entertainment; however, it reflects his passion for developing society through productive means. In short, Plato dislikes drama because he believes that it manipulates emotions, opposes reason and may return us to primitive and carnal states, or at least brings out those particular traits.
How would Plato react if he saw modern drama and other such art forms? Perhaps it would be better to specify this question. If Plato saw a modern painter at work, would he appreciate what the artist is doing? Within Plato’s Republic, he discusses the relationship between his theory of forms, art and imitation. To Plato, the painter would be far from the true form of the object of which he is painting. Therefore, Plato would not find a painting of an orange favorable, for it is an imitation and not the truth. But what about art forms that do not depict objects, such as abstract art? Plato might have an opinion on this as well. Abstract art often consists of a combination of colors. Yet, Plato would argue that those colors are simply an imitation of the true form of colors. If a streak of blue appeared on a blank canvas, then that blue is nothing but an imitation of true blueness. In fact, the canvas itself is an imitation. This all leads back to drama, especially a modern drama theatre like Broadway. In order to perform a drama, actors must be present. The purpose of actors is to imitate in order to tell a story, usually an emotional one. Plato has legitimate reason to dislike the world of drama, because it is an insult to humanity (according to his theory). Any art form celebrating imitation is deplorable to him, for he desires real truth. As previously stated, he believes that emotions should be regulated, and allowing them to overthrow the willpower that binds them may have negative consequences in regard to reason and happiness. So, Plato’s advice for a fulfilling life is to listen to reason, not your feelings.
Whether Picasso, Dali, Shakespeare, or Rembrandt are considered fantastic artists or not, it would not matter to Plato. His opposition to imitation in any artistic sense goes beyond most. In Plato’s mind, the art world engages the audience through empathy and emotion rather than rationality and reason. He views this as a something we should be worried about, yet many have discredited him. Though his views on art may be slightly biased and exaggerated, he does make a statement. The importance of searching for truth, the necessity of self-control and the responsibility required to maintain reason and order are some of the greatest lessons Plato teaches. What would Plato say about modern (and ancient) art forms? Well, does it matter? Perhaps the lessons that lie within his answers are what we should be looking for instead.
Plato’s thoughts on art, especially drama and poetry, are less than flattering. Being a man of reason, Plato longs for self-control, self-possession and restraint in relation to emotions. In his view, institutions of drama (e.g. Broadway) are negative influences and ultimately are leading mankind away from true happiness. In modern times, this perspective is often seen as ridiculous and foolish. However, Plato recognizes something about art and its effects on humans. He believes that art plays on the baser part of the mind instead of challenging the mind. For example, a person may go to a play if they are sad in order to distract themselves. Instead of deliberating with oneself over internal issues through reason, the patron becomes captivated by imaginary characters and pretend situations. Plato notes this as a waste of time. This is not to say that Plato does not understand the purpose (or even the benefit) of entertainment; however, it reflects his passion for developing society through productive means. In short, Plato dislikes drama because he believes that it manipulates emotions, opposes reason and may return us to primitive and carnal states, or at least brings out those particular traits.
How would Plato react if he saw modern drama and other such art forms? Perhaps it would be better to specify this question. If Plato saw a modern painter at work, would he appreciate what the artist is doing? Within Plato’s Republic, he discusses the relationship between his theory of forms, art and imitation. To Plato, the painter would be far from the true form of the object of which he is painting. Therefore, Plato would not find a painting of an orange favorable, for it is an imitation and not the truth. But what about art forms that do not depict objects, such as abstract art? Plato might have an opinion on this as well. Abstract art often consists of a combination of colors. Yet, Plato would argue that those colors are simply an imitation of the true form of colors. If a streak of blue appeared on a blank canvas, then that blue is nothing but an imitation of true blueness. In fact, the canvas itself is an imitation. This all leads back to drama, especially a modern drama theatre like Broadway. In order to perform a drama, actors must be present. The purpose of actors is to imitate in order to tell a story, usually an emotional one. Plato has legitimate reason to dislike the world of drama, because it is an insult to humanity (according to his theory). Any art form celebrating imitation is deplorable to him, for he desires real truth. As previously stated, he believes that emotions should be regulated, and allowing them to overthrow the willpower that binds them may have negative consequences in regard to reason and happiness. So, Plato’s advice for a fulfilling life is to listen to reason, not your feelings.
Whether Picasso, Dali, Shakespeare, or Rembrandt are considered fantastic artists or not, it would not matter to Plato. His opposition to imitation in any artistic sense goes beyond most. In Plato’s mind, the art world engages the audience through empathy and emotion rather than rationality and reason. He views this as a something we should be worried about, yet many have discredited him. Though his views on art may be slightly biased and exaggerated, he does make a statement. The importance of searching for truth, the necessity of self-control and the responsibility required to maintain reason and order are some of the greatest lessons Plato teaches. What would Plato say about modern (and ancient) art forms? Well, does it matter? Perhaps the lessons that lie within his answers are what we should be looking for instead.