Mimesis

Mimesis (μίμησις from μιμεîσθαι) in its simplest context means imitation or representation in Greek.

History

Both Plato and Aristotle saw, in mimesis (Greek μίμησις), the representation of nature. Plato wrote about mimesis in both Ion and The Republic (Book I&II and Book X). In Ion he states that poetry is the art of divine madness, or inspiration. Because of this, the poet cannot be expected nor held responsible for the conveying of truth; truth, according to Plato, is the domain of philosophy only. Consuming literature was in these days not a solitary act (people did not read books, but listened to 'performances'). Plato's main critique was that theatre was very theatrical, and therefore a rhetorican could persuade his public without necessarily telling the truth. Plato was not against rhetoric, but he insisted that one should convince by means of good arguments, and not by means of a clever way of expressing oneself (cfr sophism). In Book I&II of his Republic he argues that poets have no place in the ideal state, and that a philosopher ought to be hold the highest role as Philosopher King. In Book X he gives the reasons for this opinion - and this is the part of his theory that is known by most people. Plato thought all creation was imitation, and so the gods' creation was an imitation of the truth and essence of nature, and an artist's re-presentation of this god-created reality was twice-removed representation, leading away from the Ideal. This is why Plato considers poets, painters, and other representational artists "two steps removed from the truth."

Aristotle's poetics is often refered to as the counterpart for this Platonic conception of poetry. Aristotle was not against fiction; he stated that human beings are mimetic beings, feeling an urge to create texts (art) that reflects reality and by definition reflects about it. Moreover, they draw pleasure from the consuming of imaginary products and art is also cognitive, i.e. we use it as a way to learn about reality. Aristotle's considered it important that there be a certain distance between the work of art and life; we draw knowledge and consolation from tragedies only because they do not happen to us. Without this distance, tragedy could not give rise to katharsis. However, it is equally important that the text gives rise to a certain amount of identification; if we cannot identify with the characters and the events in the text, is does not touch us. In short, katharsis can only be archieved if we see something that is both recognisable (i.e. it could happen to us) and distant (i.e. it has not happende to us thus far)

Aristotle argued that literature is more interesting as a means of learning than history, because history deals with specific facts that have happened, and which are therefore contingent, whereas literature, altough sometimes based on history, rather deals with events that could have taken place, or should have taken place (and is therefore exemplary).

Aristotle thought of drama as being "an imitation of an action", that of tragedy as of "falling from a higher to a lower estate", and so being removed to a less ideal situation in more tragic circumstances than before. He posited the characters in tragedy as being better than the average human being, and those of comedy as being worse.

Aristotle's most well known work on this subject is his Poetics.

Walter Kaufmann in Tragedy and Philosophy Ch.II suggests that we translate mimêsis in Aristotle’s Poetics as “make-believe”.

Michael Davis, a translator and commentator of Aristotle writes:

At first glance, mimêsis seems to be a stylizing of reality in which the ordinary features of our world are brought into focus by a certain exaggeration, the relationship of the imitation to the object it imitates being something like the relationship of dancing to walking. Imitation always involves selecting something from the continuum of experience, thus giving boundaries to what really has no beginning or end. Mimêsis involves a framing of reality that announces that what is contained within the frame is not simply real. Thus the more “real” the imitation the more fraudulent it becomes. (The Poetry of Philosophy, p.3)

More recently Erich Auerbach, Merlin Donald, and René Girard have written about mimesis.

Mimesis in contrast to diegesis

It was also Plato and Aristotle who contrasted mimesis with diegesis. In diegesis it is not the form in which a work of art represents reality but that in which the author is the speaker who is describing events in the narrative he presents to the audience.
It is in diegesis that the author addresses the audience or the readership directly to express his freely creative art of the imagination, of fantasies and dreams in contrast to mimesis. Diegesis was thought of as telling, the author narrating action indirectly and describing what is in the character's mind and emotions, while mimesis is seen in terms of showing what is going on in characters' inner thoughts and emotions through his external actions.

What it does

In the arts, mimesis is considered to be re-presenting the human emotions in new ways and thus representing to the onlooker, listener or reader the inherent nature of these emotions and the psychological truth of the work of art.

Mimesis is thus thought to be a means of perceiving the emotions of the characters on stage or in the book; or the truth of the figures as they appear in sculpture or in painting; or the emotions as they are being configured in music, and of their being recognised by the onlooker as part of their human condition.

Examples

In sculpture, mimesis mirrors the plasticity of an image an onlooker has with which he can empathize within a given situation. In Rodin's The Kiss, for example, the protective arms of the male and seeming trustfulness of the female figure enclosed within her partner's limbs, down to the stance of their feet, is a position all humans would recognize immediately in that the trust and truth that permeates the erotic element of the statue is that which is entailed in the relationship of any man and woman in a similar situation.

In Picasso's Guernica, the artist re-presents the destruction of life and the terror it causes in a way this kind of cubistic image lends itself to most dramatically. The fractured details of the composition, the tortured faces, the screams that may be almost audibly imagined, the terrified horse, the bull, the dismembered limbs: all these things help making the picture most memorable for the truth it brings to the observer. However, the face of the woman holding a light may be seen either as a face of stoic resignation throwing light on the devastation, or a face of luciferous evil swooping in malevolent satisfaction.

In Beethoven's "6th Symphony" (the Pastoral), music re-presents the various stages of a stay in the country, of a person's emotions and moods that are metamorphosed into movements of music most faithfully corresponding to these emotions. Thus, the pleasurable anticipation on arrival in the country; the various happy scenes of their associating with countryfolk; a shepherd's song; birdsongs; a storm and the thankfulness after it is over; all will be observed and recognised readily by the audience.

References

Erich Auerbach, Mimesis: The Representation of Reality in Western Literature, Princeton University Press, 1953 (with reprints).
Francesca Merlan, Caging The Rainbow: Places, Politics and Aborigines in a North Australian Town, University of Hawai'i Press, 1998.
M. Taussig, Mimesis and Alterity: a Particular History of the Senses, Routledge, 1993.
Walter Kaufmann, Tragedy and Philosophy, Princeton University Press, 1992, ISBN 0-691020051.
Michael Davis, The Poetry of Philosophy - On Aristotle's Poetics, St Augustine's Press, 1999. ISBN 1-890318-620-0.
Władysław Tatarkiewicz, A History of Six Ideas: an Essay in Aesthetics, translated from the Polish by Christopher Kasparek, The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff, 1980. (Traces the history of key aesthetics concepts, including art, beauty, form, creativity, mimesis, and the aesthetic experience.)

External links