Brynne post 2

Brynne PiotrowskiThe aftermath of the disastrous and horrific events of September 11, 2001 provided many images that demonstrate American unity and courage, among other qualities. Above is just one of the multitude of pictures taken during that day. This particular photograph captures five men rescuing a victim of the attacks. Two of the rescuers are obviously firemen, but the identities of the other three are not clear. What makes this image particularly powerful is how it demonstrates American resolve, perseverance, and unity. I believe Plato would be amenable to this photograph as a work that serves to unite the country. It depicts a common bond among five seemingly unrelated men—taking responsibility for their fellow countryman. Furthermore, the determination of these men in a very dark day in America’s history is in tune with Plato’s opinions on handling grief and emotion. Plato remarks in Book X of The Republic that, “grief stands in the way of that which at the moment is most required.” Later in the same work he says, “the feeling of sorrow which has gathered strength at the sight of the misfortunes of others is with difficulty repressed in our own [self].” The five rescuers captured in this photograph have managed to overcome what Plato terms, “a natural hunger and desire to relieve our sorrow by weeping and lamentation,” (Book X) and are carrying on to deal with the task at hand. Such a quality appears to be greatly admired by Plato, as judged from his writings in Book X of The Republic.

Quite a different message emerges from this photograph depicting protestors with a United States flag bearing an illustration of torture superimposed upon it. In addition to the silhouetted figure being displayed on the flag, the flag is being flown upside down. According to Public Law 829 passed by the 77th Congress (frequently referred to as “The Flag Code”) the flag is never to be flown upside down, “except as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property.” Regardless of how appropriate that definition might be to the protestors in the picture, the flag was likely flown upside-down in this instance as a sign of disrespect. I believe Plato would look with disdain upon both the dishonored flag itself and the image of the protestors with the flag. I draw this conclusion primarily upon Plato’s interest in building-up the nation and focusing on harmony rather than discord. However, I believe Plato would also hold a hostile view towards this image because it deals with appearances and the flag serves as an imitation, as interpreted by the protestors’ points-of-view. Since Plato speaks with hostility towards both imitation and appearances in Book X of The Republic, he would likely express a similar attitude toward this image.

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.

Kim post 2

Kimberly Hambright

Available for purchase at allposters.com, the first image is one that I believe leads the nation forward. The aircrafts in the picture are arranged in a way similar to a “flying V” that we know to be extremely effective for migratory birds. The exhaust expelled from the planes appears in patriotic colors, appearing to unite the aircrafts under the title of “American.” The statement, “UNITED WE STAND If we are strong, our strength will speak for itself. John F. Kennedy,” placed at the bottom of the image clarifies to the audience exactly what feelings the work is meant to evoke. In today’s society, the purpose of the image is to unite all Americans with one common agenda. The poster evokes patriotism in the hearts of the audience as they notice the grandeur of the aircrafts both in the air and in the water’s reflection. At a time of war, a poster like this is meant to strengthen support for the cause and for the troops. Through the use of airplanes and a desolate background, the picture sells the idea that America is strong, and as a unified nation, will come out on top.

I believe that Plato would be in favor of a piece like this. Without using heavy propaganda, the artist meant to evoke a feeling of brotherhood and compassion among the people. The idea was not to question the rules and regulations of society, but instead to strengthen faith in the government and their decisions. The poster urges the people to stand together as one, unafraid of war and unafraid to wear their country’s colors proudly.

In Barbara Kruger’s contemporary piece “Repeat After Me,” a strong statement is made about society. A molded doll holds up hypnotist’s circle in a representation of the oppression of government officials. The doll appears to be made of clay, possibly portraying that he was molded by society into the cookie-cutter design of an ideal citizen. This “molded” being holds up a hypnotist pinwheel, in an effort to transform his audience into like-minded law abiding ideal citizens as well. The brainwashing device acts as a ridicule of modern society, claiming that no one has a mind of their own, but instead, all conform to the norms of society, afraid to have their own opinions, and afraid to make changes. The image calls for realization more than anything. The piece is meant to make its audience look at their own life and realize the ways in which they conform to society without thinking for themselves.

This is one piece that I think Plato would have had a problem with. It asks the reader to break off from society and think outside the box. By doing this, the whole structure of a dictatorship is threatened. A government ruled by one person can only work as long as its people are content or controlled, and because Barbara Kruger’s piece asks its audience to rebel and break out of the norm, it could be considered a threat to the State. If enough people in the Republic were exposed to artwork like this, a rebellion could break out and threaten the governmental structure.

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

Tawny N post 2

Tawny Najjar

Raising the American flag

Years ago, after the disaster of September 11^th 2001, a picture was developed that displayed the true nature of the United States of America, Labeled “New York Firefighters Raising the American Flag,” this picture, taken by Thomas E. Franklin, depicts three firefighters raising the American flag on the debris from the fallen World Trade Tower. Since that time, this picture has been used in numerous magazines and newspapers. While this image may evoke many different emotions and interpretations, it was a symbol that was used to help Americans keep going and become stronger and more unified as a country. While September 11^th was a tragic event, the weeks that followed showed the strongest sense of unity and collaboration that the United States has seen in many years. People came together to help and support one another, focusing on their neighbor, rather than themselves. Those firefighters in that picture put their lives on the line to help others. That very idea, that concept, is what our country was first founded on. Many men put their lives on the line to fight for an idea: freedom, unity. Our country was built on the backs of common people, not on the rich and powerful. The firefighters in this picture were not of noble decent or of powerful stature, but had humble jobs. The fact that firefighters, average people, were raising the flag, the symbol of our country, states that our country depends on those average people. By raising the flag on the ruins of the fallen building, a building that had previously exuded an aura of power, shows that greatness can only last so long, and many great things must someday come to an end. However, it is what we do with those ruins that determines the future. The flag in the ruble states that even though this tragedy struck hard, this country, this unified group of people, will keep moving on, hoping for the future to bring rewards that will outlast the pain and suffering. This picture, though taken at a time of weakness and sorrow, still shows the power of unity and hope. This piece of art is a photograph, and even though photographs may be doctored and twisted into false realities, they are still initially capturing a real event. The focus of the camera is not on the debris and destruction, but rather on the three firefighters, the true heroes of that day. The flag is fairly small, but the act of raising it in that setting speaks for itself. These firefighters knew what they were fighting for, the ideas that they valued. I believe that Plato would have approved of this photograph as a means of leading our country forward. He spoke very thoroughly of the immortality of the soul, that it is “able to endure every sort of good and every sort of evil.” This picture displays that concept quite clearly. Though the soul can be injured and maimed, no evil deed can totally destroy it. It is like that with the soul of this country. It will be injured, and its strength will be questioned, but whilst the people remain loyal to each other and to the ideal on which this country was built upon, the soul of the country cannot be broken.

We’re Building a New Iraq

This image, a political cartoon, depicts a darker nature of American society. In the cartoon, a man and a woman, both in army gear, are driving a bulldozer, scraping away the debris to clear a path for development and growth. They both have huge, fake smiles of their faces, as they plow on, crushing the debris, which actually turns out to be human corpses. The message that this is sending contradicts the nature of America. The United States has always advocated moving forward and developing new contacts and means of advancement. However, this cartoon shows America progressing, yet not progressing in the way that Americans would want it to be portrayed. In this image, America is moving forward, but it is moving forward by crushing others and demolishing innocent lives, with no regard to the welfare of others. This image leads the viewer to doubt the sincerity and caring nature of this country, as well as to highlight the fact that the development of America may be having an adverse effect on others. However, the man and woman in this cartoon are smiling brightly, as if they do not have a concern or a care in the world. They are not bothered by the fact that they are rolling over dead bodies, for their eyes are only on the benefits to come. They are creating a false sense of security and well-being. However, the viewer may be able to look at this cartoon and decipher it in different ways. Some one who is very much in favor of progress may just focus on the faces of the man and woman, noting how happy they are that they are moving forward. Another may look only at the corpses being pushed away, commenting on how progress can be detrimental to others. Plato spoke of this when he gave the example of the bed. He said, “You may look at a bed from different points of view, obliquely or directly or from any other point of view, and the bed will appear different, but there is no difference in reality” (The Republic Book X). By this, he states that people can try to twist forms of art in ways to support their ideas or statements, but in the end, there is a basic truth, whether people want to see it or not. By creating this political cartoon, the artist was trying to make a statement and display his/her ideas to others. However, Plato spoke about artists and their ability to imitate what they see, yet they lack the knowledge of what it actually is. An artist, he says, “is like a painter who…will make a likeliness of a cobbler though he understands nothing of cobbling; and his picture is good enough to those who know no more than he does, and judge only by colors and figures” (The Republic Book X). The artist of this cartoon created an image that shows America’s progress in a negative light, yet his knowledge of the war in Iraq or the intentions of the American government is probably very limited. The audience to which he is trying to reach, the general public, also has a limited knowledge of what is really going on, so they are easily swayed and manipulated to agree with the artist’s point. I believe that Plato would view this piece of art to have a negative effect on the forward motion of America, because while it shows the progress of America, it highlights the negative results.

Amy I

Amy Iarrobino
Post 2

The Iwo Jima memorial serves to commemorate the soldiers who fought in the Battle of Iwo Jima in which 30,000 people lost their lives. It serves as a unifying force, bringing the nation forward by promoting the ideologies of camaraderie and bravery. In fact, the sculpture of the soldiers planting the flag was cast in bronze through donations from the American people. The ability of the statue to draw so much support is a clear indicator of its unifying effect and promotion of U.S. patriotism. Plato would approve of such displays as promoting the nation as he would like to believe that art would have “noble States… appear at her best and truest.” (Book X) In this display, the State indeed appears in a positive light.

A museum in Tampa, Fl featured an exhibit called “Bodies” in which dead bodies were used as artistic medium after being preserved, dissected and posed for the viewing public. Included in the exhibit was a room featuring fetuses at each stage of development. The exhibit caused controversy and disharmony in the community due to its questionable use of the human body. More specifically, the fetus aspect of the exhibit brought attention to the national issue of abortion. In order for such a display to be made, the zygotes and fetuses had to be aborted. Thus, pro-life advocates strongly objected to its display in the museum. However, pro-choice advocates were also fearful of it as those who saw the exhibit often left with anti-abortion feelings. Therefore, the display was kept in a closed-off area with black curtains partitioning it from the rest of the museum. This example proves Plato’s point that interpretation of art as good or bad is “relative to the use for which nature or the artist has intended them.” (Book X) However, the artist is not aware of “what makes a thing good or bad.” (Book X) The artist caused conflicting feelings on both sides of the abortion issue although his purpose was geared towards scientific awareness. The artwork had different effects on viewers depending on the viewer’s opinion on abortion and scientific interest. Due to the many interpretations of the artwork Plato would consider this example as harmful to solidarity.

Ted Henderson post 2 first half

A piece of relatively current artwork that I find to support the idea of the state which we, as a nation, continually move forward towards is the film American Beauty, directed by Sam Mendes. Certainly, upon first glance, this film would appear to in many ways go against many of the qualities which are associated with the pursuit of an ideal state or nation. The film's focal characters involve themselves by choice in the use of illegal drugs, adultery, verbal abuse, physical abuse, extreme arrogance, selfishness, and towards the close of the film, even murder. Why would I choose a movie that seemingly glorifies the people who take part in this type of disorderly and immoral behavior as a piece of artwork that supports an ideal state of being? In order for me to answer this question, I must first make known the fact that the Sam Mendes' American Beauty in no way glorifies the aforementioned actions of its central characters. These immoral thoughts and actions which are depicted in the movie are not, in fact, meant to be seen in a light which deems that acceptable and appropriate, but in fact are used to give the message that such a style of living destroys individuals, families, homes, careers, marriages, friendships, and so much more in the lives of those who act in such ways. The consequences of the wrongdoings which the characters in the movie take part in are plainly shown, and all move toward the central idea by the end of the movie that such a dishonest lifestyle will not provide any sort of happiness in the grand scheme of one's existence. Dishonesty such as a wife having an extra-marital affair. Dishonesty such as a husband with blatant homosexual tendencies ruling his own home with the iron fist of an ultra-conservative blindness so as to try and counter his own guilt caused by his underlying desire for a same-sex relationship. Dishonesty such as a middle aged, married man secretly lusting after the seventeen-year-old friend of his daughter, while repeatedly denying thoughts and desires of such a perverted nature when questioned by his family members. Dishonesty such as a man waking up every day to the very same beat of the very same drum, driving to the job he hates, arguing with the wife he has lost nearly all connection with, and yet continuing on in this existence he so vehemently despises so as to avoid conflict or change, perhaps a true cowardice or sloth on his part. This movie is about honesty to one's self, and honesty between loved ones, and between neighbors, between friends and coworkers. This movie does not glorify the dark, unhappy lives of its main characters which are utterly riddled with secrets and deception, this movie glorifies the breaking free from such a dishonest existence, and the realization that life is simply to damn short to live in fear of change, and in fear of truth. That is why I believe that this film is a work of art that without a doubt encourages a state of mind and lifestyle which promotes a general state of well-being for any who were to subscribe to it. Certainly, the movie American Beauty is not in any way the answer to all questions of morality and how to live happily, but in my opinion, its writer and director certainly had an important moral message to portray through cinema with their work on the film.
I make absolutely no hesitation in assuming that, were I to send American Beauty back to the time of Plato and were he to watch the film, he would find it to be anything but art that supports movement toward an ideal state. I'm quite sure that he would find the many immoral acts and thoughts displayed in the film to be absolutely detrimental to the pursuit of ideals in the actual realm. I also believe that the philosopher would find the use of such exaggerated and dramatized emotions in the writing of the film and subsequent performances of its actors entirely unnecessary. In Book X of The Republic, when speaking of a poet who uses "lamentation" and seeming emotional "impatience" as reactions to painful circumstances in his art, Plato states that:
"...we may fairly take him and place him by the side of the painter, for he is like him in two ways: first, inasmuch as his creations have an inferior degree of truth -in this, I say, he is like him; and he is also like him in being concerned with an inferior part of the soul; and therefore we shall be right in refusing to admit him into a well-ordered State, because he awakens and nourishes and strengthens the feelings and impairs the reason."

Thus, Plato would certainly deem the use of extreme lamentation and lack of control of their emotions that the characters in American Beauty display as unacceptable to be shown in a "well-ordered State". I must admit that, in this particular instance, I completely disagree with Plato. Even if it is true that this type of overly-emotional reaction to painful life circumstances is not what we as human beings should strive for in our own behavior, it is something that every single person since the beginning of mankind has stooped to many times over in his or her lifetime. Not any one of us reaches the "ideal realm" in our behavior, and for the love of God, I'm quite certain even the beloved Plato himself at one point or another reacted emotionally to an unpleasant event or circumstance that affected his life and comfort. Thus, I believe, there is absolutely no need to try and ignore these reactions in the art that we create, and in fact, such display of human imperfection can, as I believe it is in American Beauty, be used to teach a moral lesson to the viewer, and can therefore be a very effective tool for an artist.