e tibbetts post 2

Erica Tibbetts
According to Plato, there is an idea of something, i.e. a bed and this idea is not particular or even physical. It exists beyond the realm (or above the realm) of the world we live in. This “idea” was created by a God of some sort and cannot be replicated or recreated by a human. This idea is the only truth, the only real version. Whenever a carpenter or other manufacturers creates a particular bed, this item is one step removed from the actual or real. When a painter paints a picture of this bed, the image is now two steps removed. This picture does not even have the reality of the physical bed, it captures but one visual aspect of the bed and thus contains none of its truth. Thus, it is an imitation.
The problem with imitations, in the form of paintings and poems, is that they create “passions” in the viewers/listeners. These passions would normally be subdued and deemed unworthy of public life. However the base nature of the imitative poetry and painting lets the evil nature of restrained passion show through. Plato argues that people are more likely to react to the problems of characters in poems or are more likely to voice sorrow or awe at the sight of a painting than they are to give voice to these emotions in their own private lives. He argues that these passions are “impatience” and thus are not honorable or noble sentiments. So, poetry and painting bring out ignoble qualities in people because they tap into the impatience, unadulterated passion and socially unacceptable emotions of the public.
Plato detests imitation, undue emotion and anything that incites the mass. So, Plato only likes “art” or elements of culture that increase knowledge and reality and don’t pretend to be something they are not.
In “Ion” Plato argues about knowledge, and how a person cannot know what is good (or comment on what is good) without knowing about what is bad to some extent too. He also points to the idea of “realms of understanding” and how every profession has a set of knowledge that accompanies it. When Homer writes about many different professions and describes many different acts he cannot be speaking with the depth of knowledge necessary to make him as wonderful as Ion claims. And Ion cannot act out these parts with proficiency without somehow cheating the system. Socrates also questions the idea of art vs. some sort of divine inspiration. He seems to be mocking Ion, and telling him that the only way he can claim to know how to play all the parts that Homer provides, and still be honest is to be caught in a divine reverence and be transmitting the passion and language that Homer wrote. So, again there is a return to the issue of emotion and something unnatural, some sort of unnatural transference of knowledge and understanding. Ion is imitating Homer, he is claiming knowledge he cannot have and is creating artificial, imitated entertainment.

3 images that incite the American public in such a way (to a certain extent) are: the statue of liberty, the “I want you” Uncle Sam Poster, and the American Flag. These icons represent a range of “realities” and ideas and elicit a variety of responses and reactions in the public.
The statue of liberty is more than just an image, it is an icon, a representation of many of the ideals that the United States, as a country, is based in. Although many American have never seen it in person, almost everyone knows what it looks like. This gives Lady Liberty a strange status. First of all, she is an imitation of an ideal, but not an ideal thing, object or person, an ideal quality. So, it is hard to say whether in the case of “liberty” this statue is an imitation or just an abstract, which isn’t actually an option discussed by Plato, but would probably be preferable to an imitation. In another sense, the Statue of Liberty is an imitation of a woman. When the statue was created, someone had to pose for it. And in our minds we have the idea of a woman, the platonic woman if you will. Any particular woman is removed from this ideal, and a depiction of a particular at a particular time is even farther removed, so this puts the statue within the realm of imitation. Furthermore it definitely provokes emotion and reaction from many people, not just Americans. It creates pride, happiness, anger, resentment, and any number of emotions from people who see it as a symbol of the good America can provide or the bad she can provide. In this sense, Plato would not approve. However, as I mentioned earlier, for some people the statue itself only exists in the platonic realm. I personally have never seen it, so in my mind I have an idea of it and what it stands for. In a way this idea is more perfect than the statue itself, but it definitely stems from it. I don’t know how this ideal based on an imitation can function, but it definitely deserves its own category.
The next image I will discuss is the poster of Uncle Sam saying “I want you”. This image almost certainly falls under the heading of “propaganda”, its purpose is to incite patriotism, pride, passion. These are exactly the things that Plato would have us stay away from. Too much pride and passion cause a splintering effect, distancing people from one another. Like the Statue of Liberty, Uncle Sam is the embodiment of an idea, and thus does not encompass the same sort of imitation as a painting or an epic poem. However, also like the statue, it does have a figure which in the end is imitation. This is an imitation of a man, a particular man, and it contains little of the truth that Plato would hope for. But again, Uncle Sam means more than an old man, or a cry to arms, or anything solely patriotic. He stands for something noble and (hopefully) good about the United States. And in this sense, maybe he transcends imitation, however, it is hard to tell.

The flag, the star spangled banner, is the last image I will touch upon. The flag is not an imitation, or at least the first one wasn’t, because it was original. Unless you argue that the idea or a flag, or the “ideal” exists before we can even attempt to make one. In this case, then even the first flag ever manufactured was an imitation and since then flags (especially the little tiny plastic ones, or bumper stickers, or on t-shirts, etc) have been moving further and further away from the truth and more towards kitschy kick-knacks. In this case the flag is used as a throwaway symbol of Americaness. We use it, like our language, our culture, our land, to set us apart from others. It is a representation of our independence, our difference, etc. And it is an imitation of certain things, stars, bars, colors. In a way nothing can ever be real when it takes a physical form because it creates the particular in itself and cannot get back to the platonic ideal from which it was born. So, even though the flag could be called an abstract symbol, it is still an imitation of certain artistic elements. And, although it is meant to stand for independence, democracy, etc, it still serves as a tool for division. Alas, Plato seems to condemn everything that stands for anything, and would probably have trouble accepting anything patriotic, especially produced by our power hungry, capitalistic nation.