Gebauer/Wulf, “Mimesis”

Gebauer/Wulf, "Mimesis"

Summary

There are three dimensions to the historically complex concept of mimesis, in pre-Platonic times. They are imitation, representation and expression. These applied to the whole world, including the "extraaesthetic". Plato and Aristotle defined them in the context of literature, art and music. 

Plato wrote in Republic that mimesis is most important in education. Through emulation of models, a young person assimilates themself to a standard, "proper" way of being. Later, in the third book of the Republic, Plato further defines mimesis' role in education (found under 'Similarity,  Imitation, Education' in the article). The author writes "[s]ince young people learn essentially through imitation... [they] should be shielded from everything that might interfere with their ability to fulfill tasks later entrusted to them by the state" (p. 33). Plato advocated a sort of censorship, where youth could only be exposed to good, wholesome values (through writing, music). Death and the underworld would not educate future "guardians" (students) in "courage, gallantry, and strength," (p. 33). Interestingly, Plato further defines some musical scales (dorian, phyrigian), instruments (lyre, cithara) and some rhythms unsuitable for his idealized state.

With respect to the arts, Plato defined mimesis, or imitation as the capacity to produce images. Plato's continuance appearance as mimesis is continued later in the article under 'Appearance and Illusion'.  A painter is likened to God, in that they both produce phenomena. "Painters and poets... are more similar to God than to the craftsman," Plato relates. "Artistic representation is ... the appearance of something phenomenal," (p. 38).

Else, in relation to dance, emphasizes three distinctions to mimesis, being:

1. Miming- direct representation

2. Imitation - a general sense of a person by another

3. Replication - image or effigy of person or thing

The authors define the origin of mimos (mime), is which mimesis is derived from. It first appears in Sicily, designating a "recitation... delived by one person" (p. 28). The mime depicted life "as-is" the article suggests, and there characterizations tended to be more universal than individual.

Gebauer and Wulf end with a cautious message to the artist. S/he must be conscious of the "gap" between the model and image, and not get too caught up in the "phenomenal being of things".

Response

Eeek. What? 

The author, from the get-go, seems to forget to define his purpose in writing the article, or to offer a fundamental definition of mimesis. The article doesn't have a real sense of propulsion or coherency between paragraphs and thoughts. It's as if Gebauer and Wulf were brainstorming. I found the the vocabulary and structure unneccesarily dense and unclear, as if to obscure the content for reasons unknown- maybe in an attempt to sound super intellectual.

A portion I found particularly interesting was Plato's idea that an ideal state must include censored art (poetry and music) in order to maintain sound character in youth. Good material, that which promoted strength, courage, decency, was promoted. Controversial and non-idealized material was too poor an influence on young people and they couldn't handle it, Plato argued. Greek gods could not be portrayed as weak, and images of the underworld were forbidden. To some extent, this seems to parallel the conserative parties of today's politics, with warning labels and rating systems, in the name of "public interest".

 But what's up with banning modes, instruments and rhythm. What did they ever do to Plato?