How does Aristotle differ from Plato in his theory of Imitation?

Plato was the person who first coined the term imitation. The main difference between Aristotle and Plato on imitation is that Plato defines imitation as an ‘imitation of imitation’. Plato first coined the term ‘imitation’ (mimesis). According to him, a work of art is an imitation of imitation. He has combined his views on art and aesthetics with his epistemology (with Forms). This can be described through the Socrates’ metaphor of the three beds. They can be summarized as follows. 

-One bed exists in the idea which was made by the God (Form)

-Second bed is made by the carpenter (carpenter has been an imitator as he imitates the God’s idea)

-Third bed is made by the artist by using the carpenter’s imitation

Here the truth has removed twice. That means Plato has defined art as ‘an imitation of imitation’. First, the craftsman imitates the Form. Then the artist imitates what the craftsperson has created by using raw materials.  The artistic work is therefore removed further from the reality (Form).

In contrast, Aristotle says that poet imitates the ideal reality. That means poetry is an imitation of reality. He suggests imitation as a creative process. For Aristotle, there are two types of imitation. They are,

-Imitating visual appearances (colors, paintings)

-Imitating actions (poetry, literature, music)

One type of imitation is visual imitation, which imitates reality by drawing. The second type of imitation is the imitation of human action through drama, dances, songs, and gestures. Aristotle does not restrict art, poetry and the concept of imitation. According to him, the concept of mimesis is defined through mythos and praxis. However, Plato defined imitation as an imitation of man’s action. 

Although Plato says that artworks are pure imitations, it is doubtful whether it can be called as a ‘pure imitation’. For instance, suppose a photograph represents a pure imitation. Nevertheless, we do not tend to accept it as an artwork if it does not reflect something beyond a pure imitation. It should be mentioned that if every artwork produce a pure imitation, then music and architecture would not taken under the category of artworks. Therefore, Plato’s pure imitation of artistic works is a narrow one.

In contrast, Aristotle suggests that among every artwork, drama (tragedy or comedy) is the closest artwork to the human beings as it represents the actual human actions through the actors. He says in Poetics that a tragedy produces fear and piety emotions within the spectators and it imitates the actions of the people. However, it was not in the sense that Plato suggested (pure imitation). Aristotle speaks about his theory of imitation by mentioning the objective of a poet. He says that the purpose of poets is not to tell what has happened. Poetry is different from the history as poetry represents that universal whereas history represents the particular. For instance, the tragedy of the king Oedipus can be illustrated. That particular tragedy does not report what has happen to the king Oedipus. Nevertheless, it mentions that any person who has similar characteristics as the king Oedipus would be able to experience the same situations that the king Oedipus experienced. 

According to Plato, the God created the idea of the phenomenal world. However, mind is a real one. Therefore, when someone imitates the things in the phenomenal world it becomes a copy of a reality. In contrast, Aristotle claims that the poet does not copy the external world, but the poet creates something new through his ideas of it. For him, the real and the ideal are not opposites. According to Aristotle, the real is the ideal and the ideal is the real.

Plato pays much attention on the ethical and epistemological aspect of ‘mimesis’. For him, the poet gives a corruptive impact when educating children. In addition, poets do not have true knowledge, as they do not know the Forms. He suggests that mimesis is ethically distracting whereas Aristotle does not pay much attention to the ethical and epistemological aspects of imitation. Instead, he introduced the pleasure that can be taken by watching a tragedy.  

Aristotle was the person who introduced the phrase ‘the pleasure of imitation’. The central questions that Aristotle addressed were,

-Why people prefer tragedy?

-How a tragedy could be a pleasure?

He stressed that people get some pleasure by seeing tragedy as it reflects the unhappiness which is obviously a part of day-to-day life. That is the reason why people spend money and time to see tragedies. However, Plato does not see any pleasure in imitation.

Aristotle’s Poetics stands as a direct opposition to Plato. Since Aristotle is a realist, he wanted to bring the audience into a specific plot or to make a plot in real. In contrast, Plato argued that Poetics is a mere representation of reality. In addition, he defined Poetics as a misleading book. Nevertheless, Aristotle has indicated concrete arguments in that book. 

According to Plato, poet or the artist could produce any type of an artificial thing. It has mentioned that they can create anything including trees, animals, sky, earth, sun, moon, stars etc. The artist does it as he uses a mirror that reflects the external world. Shakespeare has also mentioned the same in his drama Hamlet as acting is like ‘holding a mirror towards the nature’. In contrast, Aristotle says that the dramatist cannot fulfill his objective of creating a play in which it represents the separate situations of human life which has taken its essence to the representation. Therefore, the dramatist cannot fulfill his purpose by holding a mirror towards the human life as human life is not an orderly created one and it does not contain a pattern. As Aristotle has mentioned, the tragedy has given much priority because it is not a blind imitation. 

Plato has mentioned that the can be found a duality between art and ethics. He has mentioned that when the poems are more poetic they are not appropriate to the men’s conduct. It has mentioned that the most perfect comedy has used the most disastrous effects, which are less suited to the men’s listening. To illustrate, in the ‘Iliad’ Homer tells that the narrative of cypresses. Homer tells the story in a way that the audience feels Homer as not the speaker, but the priest as the speaker. For Plato, this way of representation transforms one’s identity. Therefore, it should be taken as a moral destruction. Aristotle also uses this transformation of identity in a different way. 

Pure imitation could reduce the value of the artworks. That is why Aristotle is more influential than Plato. Aristotle has given the value that should be given to artworks (poetry and drama).  However, there are weak points in both imitations (pure imitation and imitating actions). It is possible to imitate the essence of something through artworks. A drama or an art could represent the essence of a man or a tree by referring to a particular man or a tree. The tragic hero represents the each particular person. However, what is important is not to present biographical characteristics. Nevertheless, a character should be composed by emotions, actions, and thoughts in order to make him a real person.  Although Aristotle had a great respect to his teacher (Plato), he did not agree with some of his ideas. The reason might be Aristotle is a realist whereas Plato is an idealist. 

It should be mentioned that Plato did not banish artists just because they were poets and just because they are far from the truth. He wanted to strictly censor the artworks to make sure that they do not destroy the values of the republic. However, here arises an ethical question that when censoring the artworks it violates the freedom of artists. Aristotle emphasized more on psychological influences of imitation. When people see a tragedy or an artist imitating a practical situation related to a tragedy, they get a relief by thinking that there are more people who suffer from the same situation. Then they get some kind of a mental relief. 

In conclusion, it can be stated that both Plato and Aristotle has accept imitation as the basic performances of the artists. Nevertheless, they have used two different paths to come to that conclusion. The concept of imitation reflects the epistemological background of both philosophers too (idealism verses realism). However, both philosophers have accepted the importance of artistic works. Therefore, the concept of imitation, that both philosophers have explained, can be considered as an influential contribution to the aesthetic philosophy. 

Works Cited

Auerbach, E., & Said, E. W. (2013). Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature. (W. R. Trask, Trans.) United States : Princeton University Press.

Verdenius. (1949). Mimesis: Plato's Doctrine of Artistic Imitation and Its Meaning to Us . Netherlands: Brill.