Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Mimêsis and the Platonic Dialogue

Mimêsis and the Platonic Dialogue Abstract: The Republic is notorious for its attack against poetry and the final eviction of the poets from the ideal city. In both Book III and Book X the argument focuses on the concept of mimêsis, frequently rendered as ‘imitation’, which is partly allowed in Book III but unqualifiedly rejected in Book X. However, several ancient authors view Plato’s dialogues as products of mimêsis and Plato as an imitator. Plato himself acknowledges the mimetic character of his enterprise and invites us to compare and contrast his own mimêsis with the imitations of painters and poets. The main issue addressed in this paper is both systematic and historical: just what sort of mimêsis occurs in Plato’s dialogues and, moreover, whether and why, by the criteria that Plato’s Socrates sets out in the Republic, Platonic mimêsis may not be subject to the very same criticisms directed against Homer and the tragedians. There will emerge a radical and systematic contrast between the works of the poets, as they are assessed in the Republic, and Plato’s own writings, as they present themselves to their readers. That contrast appears to be deliberate and suggestive of the view that Plato’s dialogues (and perhaps, more generally, genuine philosophical works) ought to replace poetry as elements of proper education and civic cohesion. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Rhizomata de Gruyter

Mimêsis and the Platonic Dialogue

Tsouna, Voula
Rhizomata , Volume 1 (1): 29 – May 1, 2013
Download PDF
29 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/de-gruyter/mim-sis-and-the-platonic-dialogue-sWFB0EWpKy

References (12)

Publisher
de Gruyter
Copyright
© De Gruyter
ISSN
2196-5110
eISSN
2196-5110
DOI
10.1515/rhiz-2013-0001
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Abstract: The Republic is notorious for its attack against poetry and the final eviction of the poets from the ideal city. In both Book III and Book X the argument focuses on the concept of mimêsis, frequently rendered as ‘imitation’, which is partly allowed in Book III but unqualifiedly rejected in Book X. However, several ancient authors view Plato’s dialogues as products of mimêsis and Plato as an imitator. Plato himself acknowledges the mimetic character of his enterprise and invites us to compare and contrast his own mimêsis with the imitations of painters and poets. The main issue addressed in this paper is both systematic and historical: just what sort of mimêsis occurs in Plato’s dialogues and, moreover, whether and why, by the criteria that Plato’s Socrates sets out in the Republic, Platonic mimêsis may not be subject to the very same criticisms directed against Homer and the tragedians. There will emerge a radical and systematic contrast between the works of the poets, as they are assessed in the Republic, and Plato’s own writings, as they present themselves to their readers. That contrast appears to be deliberate and suggestive of the view that Plato’s dialogues (and perhaps, more generally, genuine philosophical works) ought to replace poetry as elements of proper education and civic cohesion.

Journal

Rhizomata – de Gruyter

Published: May 1, 2013

Keywords: imitation(s); representation; likeness; narrative (simple vs. mimetic); copy vs. original; moral corruption; moral improvement

There are no references for this article.