post 2

Justin Wright

makes his second post.

http://www.glasssteelandstone.com/Images/US/NY/NYC/FreedomTower-014.jpg

This image has been altered by computer to show the Freedom Tower artificially rendered into the New York City skyline. The Freedom Tower is currently under construction, and will replace the World Trade Center towers that were destroyed on September 11, 2001. I believe that this image leads the nation forward, since it shows that we, as a nation, will work to undo the damage of terrorist attacks and stand strong to prevent them. This image also appeals across party lines; even those who disapprove of the war in Iraq or the continuation of the war on terror can agree on the heinousness of the September 11 attacks, and that we should not let them tear the nation apart.

Plato would agree that this image is good for the nation, because it inspires unity and strength. But he most likely would denounce this image on the grounds of being totally untrue – it was digitally generated. Plato ranks the arts below both the ideal realm and the actual realm, for imitating an imitation of the essential form. He would rank fictitious images as the bottom of this category, for not being a form of mimesis at all, and showing a reality that does not currently exist. Plato suggested that only true poems and plays should be performed in The Republic, for the good of the state, and creating a false image to inspire virtue would be no better than to encourage discord – it would almost imply that good does not actually exist, and must be falsified.

http://www.brusselstribunal.org/images/accountable.jpg

This image shows an anti-Bush rally in Brussels, Belgium. It shows a banner displayed above people standing solemnly in front of it, supporting the message. I interpret this image as destructive to the United States, not because of the message of the protesters, but because of the discord it can propagate. Since these are Belgians, people could generalize that the entire nation of Belgium hates President Bush, and they may generalize further and think they hate the United States. Some may even take this to the extreme and think that because Belgians dislike Bush, all foreigners dislike Bush, and much of the world hates the United States. Although erroneous, not much information to the contrary makes it to the media. News of anti-America and anti-Bush protests are often shown, but never the actual statistics of how many people in these countries are opposed to the nation of America in general. Also, at home, this effect increases divisiveness between support and opposition to Bush, because the opposition perceives him to be one of the most hated men in the world today.

Plato would not support the use of this image, because it propagates discord in the state and sullies the leader. Even if it was true that all foreigners everywhere hated the nation’s leader, Plato would not condone allowing such messages to exist in the state. Such images would decrease the faith of the citizen in his ruler, and therefore his allegiance to the nation. Such an effect would be more detrimental to the state than the infamous leader himself, because Plato regarded the state as easily corrupted by influences contrary to those that encouraged virtue, harmony, and allegiance.

Rob H post 2

Rob Hoffman

http://www.posterwire.com/wp-content/images/uncle_sam.jpg

Of the three images in my post, this is probably the most familiar to all of us. We have all seen at least one such poster, the goal of which is to promote patriotism and encourage voluntary enlistment in the U.S. armed forces. To appeal to the historians among us, the historical context of Uncle Sam actually dates back to its first war-time usage in 1812, although the poster from which the above image is derived was not created until 1917 and World War I. There are several explanations for Sam’s origins, ranging from a Samuel Wilson who supplied American soldiers with meat to an Irish/Gaelic acronym for the U.S.A.

There are those who would claim that such an image is good for the country, as it promotes patriotism and support for the nation; Plato would likely be in this category. They would consider the decision of a young man or woman to enlist in the military as a great and honorable act, a kind of self-sacrifice for the greater good of the nation that is deserving of praise. There are others, however, who might disagree and contend that this image is actually fairly destructive. They would claim that this kind of recruitment campaign represents blatant brainwashing, and that any individual who gets enlists after being “inspired” by this poster would be lured into a position to be used by the government as an expendable resource. They would consider this an example of propaganda that is lacking in any significant amount of truth.

As stated above Plato would almost definitely see the image as positive. While he makes it clear in The Republic that he believes that most art forms ought to be suppressed, he does make exception for poems about significant and great individuals, presumably because such poems would inspire other citizens to follow in their footsteps. In many ways this is analogous to Uncle Sam. He serves as a kind of governmental propaganda that would serve to strengthen the control of the state over the populace; in this way he satisfies Plato’s requirement for acceptable art.

http://www.sptimes.com/2005/08/18/images/xlarge/WK_0_wk18Body_219413_0818.jpg

This image is more contemporary than either of the other two, and perhaps more controversial in its own right. The picture is from one of the body exhibits that have become popular in recent years in various museums throughout the country and indeed the world in general. The remains of human bodies are preserved and dissected in various and sundry ways to present the human anatomical form as a work of art. It is not too difficult to image why a fair number of people have an issue with this. The treatment of the bodies defies normal conventions about the proper way to care for the dead. There are also issues of how the corpses were obtained, with some vague possibility that the individuals incorporated in certain displays might not have given consent to being turned into works of at.

Clearly there are those who view this as a serious detriment to our nation. They abhor the exhibits, considering them to be ghastly and ghoulish aberrations of nature. There are also those, however, who view these displays with a greater degree of fascination, interest, and even admiration. They consider the exhibits to be not only a learning opportunity, but also a chance to celebrate the human form. They would view its existence as a positive, if for no other reason than its demonstration that we are overcoming the superstitions that would otherwise prevent us from enjoying such a work.

How Plato might feel about this particular type of art is not as clear cut as either of the other two examples. On the one hand we might surmise that Plato himself would actually be fascinated by the displays and what he might be able to learn from them. Then again, given his historical context, he might be repulsed by them. Ultimately, it might not matter in the least. Although Plato might not consider this as a type of art that actively divides and incites strife and quarrel, he would also still not see that as fitting in any of the categories of his accepted art. These exhibits might escape banning if they were considered as art, but if they remained classified as art (which is arguable even today), then they would be banned.

http://z.about.com/d/atheism/1/7/5/4/3/Both-Sides-e.jpg

The style of this image might evoke a sense of it being outdated, but the issues that it raises are still perfectly potent and relevant. Debates still rage to this day over the teaching of evolution in schools. This image simply makes an appeal that students be exposed not to one side or the other, but rather to the debate itself. If they are taught both sides, the image says, then they can choose for themselves. Interestingly enough, this argument has been used by both sides on a number of issues. Evolution once had to fight to be taught alongside more traditional, Biblical creationism, and now proponents of intelligent design are trying desperately to merely get their “theory” taught alongside evolution as another option.

There are those who are opposed to this mentality and who would consider an image such as this harmful. The majority of those who stand in opposition do not actually fall along a left/right split, but rather a moderate/extremist split. Only the extremists on either side, the radicals, truly would want to quash any notion of teaching students two sides of any really debated issue. Granted, some of these issues, such as the Holocaust, are generally accepted to have only one side, and teaching the opposite (perhaps that the Holocaust did not happen) might not be well accepted. Still, the majority of people would probably (hopefully) support the idea of telling students both sides and allowing them to use their reason and good sense to chose the side with the better arguments and stronger evidence.

Plato, however, would not like this issue. Although his teacher Socrates was a great supporter of seeking knowledge by questioning an issue from all sides, this sort of freedom would be dangerous to the state that Plato is constructing in The Republic. Given the mass education of this sort might ultimately have a destabilizing effect upon the state (contrasted with the propaganda-esque Uncle Sam image), Plato would encourage banning artwork that suggested any kind of open education of students about both sides of all issues.

Morgan F., Post 2

Morgan Frost

The Bermuda Triangle by Philip Core (1982).

This artwork was painted by gay artist Philip Core. It presents three men climbing together into a boat after swimming. It appears that their activities are recreational, and if take the history into account, we might assume that these men are gay. But the important part is that even if they are gay, they are participating in activities that any person might enjoy. People of all ages and background can relate to swimming and being in a boat.

America is a country with people of all sexualities. However, we are still in a divided state. Homosexuals are persecuted against every day. Many people believe homosexuals are different people, even considering them lower in human value, and these kinds of thoughts are disharmonious and cause conflicts. In order to relieve these problems we must attempt to unify the state as one. Only together can the state be most glorious, and artwork provides a vessel for one means of unification. This painting in particular can move the nation forward by showing common ground between homosexuals and heterosexuals.

Using historical evidence, we can see that Plato would agree with the view that the portrayal of homosexuals is a unifying display rather than one that would incite quarrels. In his society, many people had homosexual relations, and to recognize this and portray it as acceptable would be a step forward for the nation. Something to look at about this, though, is that Plato mentions the problem in The Republic of people interpreting the same object with different views. Thus even a painting that may be intended to have a positive effect on its viewers can have a negative one. “And the same object appears straight when looked at out of the water, and crooked when in the water; and the concave becomes convex” (Book X).

This picture is a display of the fantasy creatures from the Magic group that markets products such as books and games for today’s wizard-interested citizens. This piece almost idolizes violence. The creatures are depicted as larger and more powerful purely by brute force and fire, and seem to be defeating the men.

The violence of this art is very common in America today. Many young children play games that promote violence. Violence is destructive to harmony between peoples. So with art like this being publicized to the nation, we are being led toward disharmony and conflict rather than unification and any hopes of glorification.

Plato, however, would disagree with this sentiment. He supported aggressive behavior, following the admiration Socrates had for militaristic Sparta. Plato would think that violence is a means to conquering, and thus giving power to his own state. To him, this would be part of the unification process as the men come together to fight the enemy, and the dominance in the picture would signify glory. As clarified in his writing in The Republic, Plato believes that an image can be received for its interpretation of truth rather than its direct representation of something that is untrue. “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). In the picture we can be led on by the image of monsters as an untruthful representation (eg mythical monsters), but to be received as representing power and dominance over another party.

Jessica D., post 2

Jessica Duran

http://www.stellapopeduarte.com/photo.html

The universal appeal of art is apparent both in ancient and modern times. Artwork has the power to evoke an array of intense emotions from its audience. Its seductive and illusive influence is a central controversial debate in Plato’s The Republic, in which the place for art in an ideal society and how to evaluate it are discussed in great detail. For this assignment, I chose the Vietnam War memorial as an example of a current artwork that serves to direct our nation toward unity. This national war memorial was erected in honor of the members of the U.S. armed forces that died or went missing during the Vietnam War.

I believe that Plato would agree that the Vietnam War Memorial is a valid example of a current artwork that leads our nation toward unity. In book X of The Republic, Plato states, “Notwithstanding this, let us assure our sweet friend and the sister arts of imitation that if she will prove her title to exist in a well-ordered State we shall be delighted to receive her”). Plato spoke extensively on how the arts had the power to shape a person’s character and psyche. He believed that art was a cheap imitation that clouded our ultimate understanding of the truth and therefore reasoned that art must prove itself to be useful in order to be allowed in an ideal state. I believe that this memorial proves itself useful by allowing people to reflect on the high price that we pay for war and also the precious value of human life. It also reinforces the importance of accepting and embracing the differences of others if we are ever to achieve true peace and harmony. Each year as millions of people visit this memorial, I hope that they leave remembering to always actively pursue the ideal Forms of Peace, Justice, Equality, Unity, and Harmony, not only in our nation, but also on a global level as well.

http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/directory/a/anti-american.asp

Though art can serve to be beneficial to mankind on many counts, it can also serve to have detrimental effects as well. For this part of the assignment, I chose this cartoon as an example of art that serves to separate our nation and prevents us from ever truly uniting as one.

In Book X of The Republic, Plato states, “Thus every sort of confusion is revealed within us; and this is that weakness of the human mind on which the art of conjuring and of deceiving by light and shadow and other ingenious devices imposes, having an effect upon us like magic”; ultimately revealing the corruptive and deceptive influence that the arts can have on people. He believed that if the arts were not strictly censored, then we would never find truth and wisdom. I believe that Plato would consider this to be an example of art that misrepresents the truth and does not contribute to our understanding. This artwork is degrading towards the United States of America and serves to deceive its audience into believing that our nation is worthless and inferior. Despite the differences in political views that individuals may have, it is our duty to first and foremost respect our nation regardless of our own personal political opinions. This artwork is outrageously disrespectful to the nation that we live in and the values for which it stands; only serving to further divide our nation and preventing us from every truly being united.

laura cleary, post 2

Image 1:

In this image, we see a transformation of Grant Wood's The American Gothic, into a modern political and cultural piece. In place of the farmer and his wife, we see two of American culture's most candid faces. President Bush and Paris Hilton make quite the pair. I believe the artist has entitled his version of the famous artwork very well, by changing it to "The American Nightmare". We have allowed the less intelligible to become the icons four our day and age. Although many see through the lack of depth and careless natures both of these individuals possess, they are still, unfortunately, two of the most influential members of our society. This image demonstrates how thoughtless and lazy-minded Americans have allowed themselves to become, yet can lead the nation forward by forcing them to realize who it is they are truly idolizing. This type of art can reach all types of people because it uses an older, more popular work and transforms it into something radically different.
Plato, however, would see differently. Firstly, this work of art is only a representation of another piece of art, and could also be said to be suggestive propaganda. Instead of actually seeing President Bush and Paris Hilton, we see humorous replicas of them doctored into what becomes an imitation of reality.

Image 2:
http://peacecorpsonline.org/messages/imagefolder/abughraib.jpg

This second image is a blatant representative of what is hindering our nation's prosperity, both internally and internationally. Of course many opposed the recent war (and the "non-war actions we are currently involved with) for various reasons, yet no positive sentiments will ever be received by the Governmental agencies that were involved in happenings such as the one the image displays. This displays an inmate at the Abu Ghriab prison who is being threatened with electrocution by his guards. Sadly, this is one of the many torturous events that took place. Our country cannot benefit from acts such as the one this image displays and Plato would agree with that fact. Yet, he would not recommend the controversy that would arise in the community from this apparent truth. But, as a philosopher seeking what is true and real in the world, why shouldn't the people be aware of what is going on in society.

Ashley G., Post 2

Ashley Green

In Book X of Plato’s The Republic, Plato discusses the influence of the poet’s and painter’s work on the soul. He proposes that works of these artists are negative in several ways- they remove the viewer even further from the truth, or the ideal realm, and they appeal to the emotional side of a person’s soul, instead of the rational in which he deems “the best side.” Yet he acknowledges that the pull artistic works has on the emotional side of a person’s soul can be useful because it unifies. Throughout modern history, various figures have attempted to use artistic works to glorify their achievements and unite the people. In the early stages of America’s war with Iraq, the images presented by the media to the American public had a very distinct flavor- they were of Iraqi children cheering on American soldiers who were fighting for their liberation, men cheering in the streets because of the end of a tyrant’s regime, and a president standing behind a “mission accomplished” sign on a Air Force flight hanger. One of the most pervasive images from the time was the photo of a group of Iraqis tearing down the statue of their former leader. It represented the end to a tyrants rule, the liberation of a weary people, and victory against terrorism. It helped Americans feel that they were right to be in Iraq because the work that was being done was paramount to the preservation of freedom and justice not only for Americans, but for all people. I believe Plato would approve and support the images above because they not only unified a nation behind a cause, but also promoted the ideals of justice for all people. Also, this set of images would conform to Plato’s idea that art should be restricted to only works that unify. The photos that emerged from the beginning of the war in Iraq were very censored, and only chosen by various media sources if they fit particular “patriotic” purposes.

The second set of images is from an anti-war campaign. They use a popular advertisement, for Apple iPods, and alter them to show more controversial images of the war, particularly the scandal from the Abu Ghairb Prison and soldiers in battle. They would be considered provocative, divisive, and combative by many. The works, however, are intentionally meant to be disharmonious in order to evoke an emotional response against the conflict in Iraq. Plato would disapprove of the works, likely for both their function and content. He would disapprove of the photos because of their blatant attempt to provoke a negative emotion over a rational emotion. Furthermore, the above images are an example of an unmediated and uncensored image. He would not approve of a work that did not glorify or promote the nation at large.

Aaron Post 2

Aaron Childree

I think this is the type of image that does not help move society forward at all. There are many images like this that mock President Bush’s intelligence or leadership ability. I understand that there are lots of people who disagree with some of President Bush’s actions and they probably have very good reasons for disagreeing, but he is the current President of the United States and it would be better for the country as a whole if we were unified in our thinking. I think it is important to understand that free speech and speaking out against the government is our right in this country and that at times it can be beneficial, but I think it is also important to understand that our country is in a difficult time right now and that President Bush is handling the situation in the way that he thinks is best for the country (whether it actually is best is a different story).

I think Plato would agree that images bashing President Bush are not beneficial to society. Plato understood the power of images and thought that they should be used to benefit society. I think that a personal attack on the president doesn’t help the problem at all. This image gives no solution to any issues the country is dealing with, it only points out that the President is not very intelligent. I think that the greatest benefit would come from images that unify the country under our current leader, whether they agree with him or not and if they do disagree, it should be done in a way that addresses real issues and offers solutions.

On the other hand, this image is an image that affects society in a positive way. Instead of mocking someone who is against Civil Rights, it shows Martin Luther King, Jr. giving a speech to a large crowd during the Civil Rights movement. This image reminds people how hard some people had to fight to obtain equality in this country and will hopefully cause people of all races to not take their freedom for granted.

I think Plato would agree that this is a positive image and would benefit society because it unites people under the banner of freedom and equality of the races. It shows a time in which changes were made in a way that benefits society, whereas I would argue that the personal attack on President Bush is asking for a change in a way that is detrimental to society.