Defining art is dependent on many factors relative to humanity. It is a humanistic mimicry of their surroundings. Labeling something art is subjective, yet objective as well. An early confrontation of this issue was displayed in the sentiments of the philosophers Aristotle and Plato. Although both agreed that it was indeed a mimesis, the Greek word for imitation, and a techne, which means skills, Plato felt it to be a deviation from truth and beauty, kalos k’agathos. To Aristotle it was more than “destructive” aesthetic idealism. Aristotle and Art was defined upon being recognized as more than a copy and ultimately, varying from person to person, it is labeled so respectively. Aristotle believed that art was an enjoyable path to understanding and learning about one’s surroundings. Therefore art was true and beautiful. Plato was convinced that imitation of unoriginal thought through art, any type, was a destructive vanity. Another example of this argument of perspective was aimed at the piece, The Bird by Constantin Brancusi. Upon entering the country it was rej...
Aristotle believed that art could in fact advice a being bigger accept the aspect of something. Aristotle thought, can advance a being afterpiece to the truth, because art tends to abstruse the anatomy or aspect of something complete of substance. In added words, art ability actual able-bodied advice us admit what it is that absolutely makes an angel to be an apple, because the representation of an angel has to focus on the essentials of what an angel looks like. Aristotle believed that art was complete because it can be cathartic; it can accord us the befalling to abolition affections so that we can go aback to cerebration clearly. Some humans charge a acceptable cry every already in a while.
To recall another relic of ancient Greece, Plato had strong opinions on artwork, even that which was created during his time. Plato believed tha...
Plato’s ideas. There are many different aspects of Greek art that can be accredited to Plato
In my view, art is the representation and transmission of thought. It is the representation of the thoughts or experiences of an artist, created to transmit and subsequently evoke the same thoughts or experiences vicariously in an audience, via the artist’s creation. I believe art is based on the fact that people, through their own perceptions, can experience the same thoughts or feelings as the artist. I...
The construct of the ‘Roman copy’ in art history has deeply rooted and extensive origins. Whilst this prejudiced was attached to Roman sculpture from an extremely early time in modern archaeology and art history, the construct viewed in a current context reveals issues with both its development and contribution to historical understanding and education. The construct is formed upon several main factors that have recently been called into question by revisionist historians. Firstly, the development of the construct by conservative historians during the 18th century, a context that valued artistic originality and authenticity, lead to it’s popularisation and circulation as a respected model. Secondly, the construct rests entirely on the presumption that Greek art is in fact aesthetically and artistically superior, insinuating a negative predisposition towards Roman artistic workmanship and aesthetics. Lastly, technological advancements aiding historiography have asserted the fact that many conclusions drawn by conservative historians through their methodology are in fact irrefutably incorrect. While the basis for much of the conservative historians argument has been seen as flawed, or otherwise seriously questioned in terms of accurate and reliable history, the construct of ‘Roman copies’ of Greek originals has remained a legitimised understanding and interpretation of Roman art for centuries. The question can then be raised as to whether the attention given to this aspect of history is worth the fact that much of the history being taught is now being heavily questioned.
In this paper, I will express the thought and feeling that Vincent Van Gogh’s painting, Bank of the Oise at Auvers, Oil on canvas, 1890, gives me. Bank of the Oise at Auvers depicts eleven small boats on the bank of the river Oise in France. A woman is seated in one boat and a man and woman are standing on the shore. I did not wonder into the Detroit Institute of Arts trying to find a painting to write about for an assignment, I entered the museum though, hoping for a painting to notice me and speak to me. That is exactly what this work accomplished. The work caught my eye in a noticeable fashion. What I noticed the most were the boldness of the brush strokes, and how the colors expressed do not blend carefully with each other, but rather they all individually stand out. You can notice very easily the direction in which the strokes are heading, and what message they are trying to convey. There are many reasons that I chose this painting, and I will go into fine detail throughout the course of the paper of exactly what I mean.
... be a need for self expression and a desire to understand the perception of others. Whether it is a masterpiece or the simplicity of a mother nurturing a newborn babe, art is in the impact of the experience.
In The Republic, Plato espouses some unique views on art. To begin, he does not think too highly of it. For starters, he worries
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...
The relationship between art and society: Mimesis as discussed in the works of Aristotle, Plato, Horace and Longinus The relationship between art and society in the works of Plato are based upon his idea of the world of eternal Forms. He believed that there is a world of eternal, absolute and immutable Forms (the world of the Ideal) and thought that this is proven by when man is faced with the appearance of anything in the material world, his mind is moved to a remembrance of the Idea or an absolute and immutable version of the thing he sees. It is this moment of recollection that he wonders about the contrast between the world of shadows and the world of the Ideal. It is in this moment of wondering that man struggles to reach the world of Forms through the use of reason. Anything then that does not serve reason is the enemy of man. Given this, it is only but logical that poetry should be eradicated from society. Poetry shifts man’s focus away from reason by presenting man with imitations of objects from the concrete world. 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 can be defined in many ways by an individual. One can say that any creative output by a person is considered art. Others contend that art must conform to a societal standard and the basis of the creation should be understood by most intellectual people. For example, some contend that computer-generated images, such as fractals, are not art due to the large role played by a computer. E.O. Wilson states “the exclusive role of the arts is to intensify aesthetic and emotional response. Works of art communicate feeling directly from mind to mind, with no intent to explain why the impact occurs” (218). A simple definition may be that art is the physical expression of the ideals formed by the mind.
Mimesis, the ‘imitative representation of the real world in art and literature’ , is a form that was particularly evident within the governance of art in Ancient Greece. Although its exact interpretation does vary, it is most commonly used to describe artistic creation as a whole. The value and need for mimesis has been argued by a number of scholars including Sigmund Freud, Philip Sydney and Adam Smith, but this essay will focus on the arguments outlined by Plato in The Republic and Aristotle in Poetics, attempting to demonstrate the different features of imitation (mimesis) and what it involves for them both. In Plato’s The Republic, he discusses what imitation (mimesis) signifies to him and why he believed it was not worthy of the credit or appreciation it was so often given. In Aristotle’s Poetics on the other hand, he highlights the importance of imitation not just in art, but also in everyday life and why imitation within tragedy is necessary for human development.
From ancient to more modern critics, art is defined, vilified, or redeemed by its ability to imitate. Aristotle values imitation as a natural process of humanity. Tragedy is simply a manifestation of the human desire to imitate. He asserts that every person "learns his lesson through imitation and we observe that all men find pleasure in imitations" (44). Unlike Plato's world of Forms, knowledge of truth and goodness are rooted in the observable universe to Aristotle. Because imitation strives to create accurate particularized images of the real world, it is a source for potential discovery and delight. Neoclassical criticism accepts as givens Aristotle's statements about the nature of art and reality. Art is valuable precisely because it is imitative. As Sir Philip Sydney states, "Poesy is an art of imitation...with this end, to teach and delight" (137). Imitation not only entertains, but gains a moral/ethical purpose: to teach virtue. Artists must, in addition to possessing great creative skills, also bear moral responsibility for shaping their imitations. Samuel Johnson seems to revisit Plato's attack upon art with his admission that an accurate imitation of morally questionable subject matter is not only unacceptable, but potentially harmful to those who encounter it. In order to accommodate a strong moral sense, Johnson describes imitation as a process of interpretation. "The business of a poet... is to examine, not the individual, but the species.
First, Plato believed that ideas are the realist things in the world. What we see in our daily life is not reality; sense perceptions are only appearances. And appearances are unreliable material copies of the immaterial pure ideas. Thus to him the world of the ideas is reasonable and fixed and holds the truth. While the world of physical appearances is variable and irrational, and it only bears reality to the extent that it succeeds in capturing the idea. To live the best life that you can and to be happy and do good, as a person you have to strive to understand and imitate the ideas as best as you can. So, with this philosophy in mind we can understand why Plato considered art as just a mindless pleasure. He viewed art as just an imitation.
views as to what art is; and as they say, beauty is in the eye of the