Plato's Objection of Poetry and Defence

•  Plato’s objection of Poetry and Defense:

            Plato was a philosopher and critic. As being strong moralist he objected poetry. He puts his objection from various points of view. Those are:

1                     .     Educational point of view

2                     .     Philosophical point of view

3                     .     Moral point of view

Let’s see in detail.

1.     Educational Point of view:

             Plato wrote in ‘The Republic’ that poetry don’t give any contribution in planting morality in children. Instead of it , it puts evil in children. Poetry does very harmful effect on children’s mind.

            When children read poetry, it is misinterpreted by them The hero or the villain can make any effect upon them. So Plato says that Homer’s epic were part of studies. Hero’s of epic were lusty, cunning and cruel. Even gods were portrayed very badly. Gods were shown fighting among themselves.When we teach a children god’s such stories. They find bad effect in their mind.

            Plato says that we should not tell even a word about war to children. They are having strong impression of their teachers. So in the education if teachers says them about war and violence then they get wrong impression in their mind.

2.     Philosophical point of view:

             Plato believes that poetry is not good for society. He was very much concerned with national progress and he believed that poetry prevents this progress. He wanted a state based on truth and justice and humanity and he says that instead of leading, poetry drives people away from truth. He threw away the old belief that poetry comes out at the moment of 'frenzy', so it is divine truth.

             Plato gives the theory of mimesis. According to this theory poetry is twice removed from truth. To explain it he gives very famous example of carpenter’s chair. In ‘The Republic’ Plato says that “ideas are the ultimate reality”. Carpenter first gets an idea to make a chair, then he shapes a chair(it is imitation of idea), then a painter draws that chair(it is imitation of imitation). So poetry, is merely an imitation. And when a poet imitates something then he is not aware from real thing. So poetry becomes trivial and worthless thing.
              Plato was dreaming for strong and ideal state. For it all citizens should have developed mind and intellect. but poetry makes people emotional and it is harmful for good administration.
              Like the example of carpenter's chair there is another example of mimesis. That first God imagined nature and the universe in his mind(ultimate reality), Then he created it(imitation of an idea), then what a poet does? he writes a poem on nature which becomes imitation of an imitation. According to Plato when such imitation takes place something is lost from original. And then Plato says:

        "The imitator or maker of the image knows nothing of true existence ; he knows appearance only...The imitative art is an inferior who marries an inferior and has inferior offspring."

3.     Moral point of view:

            Plato was having high moral values. So obviously he demands righteousness in literature and art. He stresses on rationality in a person. There is a quote in “The Republic”:

           “In literature many evil livers are happy and many righteous men are unhappy ; and wrong doing is often profitable while hones dealing is beneficial to one’s neighbor, but damaging to one’s self.”

              As a firm moralist Plato can’t digest such injustice in literature. According to him poetry feeds, waters and nourishes the lower and unhealthy emotions and passions. To maintain morality in mind one should be stable and rational. And it is true that sentimentality and rationality never walks together. Here again the point of imitation is raised. A poet imitates to gain popularity. Plato harshly says:

          “...we shall be right in refusing to admit him(a poet) into a well-ordered state, because he awakens and nourishes and strengthens the feelings and impairs the reason...”

             He strongly denies a poet’s living in the state. For welfare of state and society poetry is obstacle. So, these are his objections from various points of view.

            

•              Defence:

                   

                           R.A.Scott James states:

                        “...but though he(poet) creates something less than reality, he also create something more. He puts an idea into it. He puts his perception into it. He gives us his intuition of certain distinctive and essential qualities.”

                        In above statement Scott says in defence of poets. He says that, poets are not only putting the things as it was, but they add something new in it. So it should not be called imitation, because in their creation their own idea and their originality are put. So sometimes it happens that imitation is more beautiful than original. This ‘more’ is poet’s creation and originality. This is the defence to Plato’s charge from the philosophical point.

                     The second defence is against Plato’s educational objection. Plato says that epics and poetry with cunning and lusty heroes and violent Gods should not be taught. To this we can say that those things can be cleared to children. And in such epics there are good things also. So these good things can be highlighted. So the poetry is not the reason of bad thing in education.

                    Then the defence to moral point of view. According to Plato, poetry fills poison in people’s mind. And teaches immoral things to people. But artists are not to teach people. But they are intended to please people. If one get any impression weather it is good or bad then it is his own responsibility. So poetry does not give benefit as well as it does not harm also.

                    An art only expresses. It is not aimed to teach or to improve. Plato confuses the study by making mixture of art and philosophy. Plato charge that poetry leads people towards useless ecstasies. For it Aristotle gives defence in his theory of ‘catharsis’. He says that sometimes this access of emotions is necessary for balanced state of mind. Plato thinks that poetry should be like philosophy, while both the things are unique. How can they both be the same thing ? Philosophy teaches and poetry delights. Every art has its own value. So at some extent Plato, in spite of being great thinker, could not understand such basic fact. It is true that for society poetry and philosophy both are equally worthy.