Ally, Post 2

Ally Best

Some artwork has an incredible ability to evoke passion and strong emotions from viewers. Such pieces of art can sway a person’s opinions and even instill in them a sense of compassion, love, hatred, anger, unrest, or patriotism. One such example is the statue designed after September 11^th depicting three men raising the flag at ground zero. This is a very powerful image that has several enormous symbolic values. First of all, the three men working together represents the unity of Americans and the need for the nation to put aside individual differences and act as one. The fact that the statue depicts the men raising the flag at ground zero is also symbolic. Their act is one of rebuilding, or even triumph. The statue seems to be saying, “Even when we get knocked down, we will always rise again.” This image clearly sparks patriotism and, for that reason, I think Plato would approve of the statue. In The Republic, Plato says, “…let us assure our sweet friend and the sister arts of imitation that if she will only prove her title to exist in a well-ordered State we shall be delighted to receive her—we are very conscious of her charms; but we may not on that account betray the truth” (book X). With this comment, Plato is basically acknowledging that imitation (art) can have a very powerful effect and therefore it should be monitored to include only pieces that are truthful and that do not go against the State. The statue of the men at ground zero strengthens the State by uniting the people, while still retaining a relatively accurate depiction of a true event. Thus, the statue seems to fit Plato’s description of “acceptable art.”

Just as some images can bring the people of a nation together and spread patriotism, others can divide the nation and conjure a distrust for government institutions. One such piece of artwork is the controversial sculpture “Loose Lips Sink Ships” by Peter Langenbach, which sparked a huge uproar when it was banned from the California State Fair*. The sculpture illustrates Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky in a bathtub together. The sculpture was considered by some to be inappropriate because of its graphic sexual nature. However, I believe Plato’s disapproval would have also been centered around the fact that the sculpture pokes fun at a high-ranking government official and portrays an image the artist has (presumably…) never actually seen. This ridicule creates, for some, a sense of distrust of the government or, at the very least, it seems to enforce the idea that even the president of the United States is far from errorless. Plato’s primary concern would most likely have been that this distrust would spread through the “ignorant masses,” as he describes in The Republic when he says, “…if he is a good artist, he may deceive children or simple persons, when he shows them his picture of a carpenter from a distance, and they will fancy that they are looking at a real carpenter” (book X). In this statement, Plato explains his belief that some people are easily deceived and therefore may take what they see in a work of art to be reality without questioning. The sculpture could have a negative effect on some people’s view of the State so Plato would almost certainly not have approved.

*information about Peter Langenbach statue taken from http://www.your3dsource.com/controversial-artwork.html