Plato's Arguments for Censorship

In Book 10 of The Republic, Plato presents a logical argument of the arts, specifically pertaining to painting and poetry, and comes to the conclusion that art should be censored. Plato's basic reasoning for censoring the arts starts off with him explaining that art is imitation, or mimetic, and thus twice removed from the truth. Because art is twice removed from the truth, or a representation of a truth, it appeals to the irrational part of our brain. Therefore, art can corrupt a character by influencing undesirable emotions and should indeed be censored.

In the beginning of this selection from Plato, beds and tables are used as examples to distinguish how art is removed from the truth. We have the form of an item, or product of divine craftsmanship as Plato puts it, such as a bed or a table. Then we have a creation of that form which is manufactured by a particular person or craftsman, and then we have a representation of that manufactured form. That original idea or form of a bed, a table, gold, or any item really, is considered to be the 'truth' or true form. Hence, Plato concluded that artists who paint and sculpt produce items that are twice removed from the truth and they have no actual grasp on the original true form. Based on this conception, the artist is merely a 'representer,' illusionist even, of other people's creations. In other words, artists are representing representations of which they have no great knowledge. The exception to this notion, according to Plato, is a poet. Representational poetry is only once removed from the truth because there is no manufactured form of their ideas. However, a representational poet is "concerned with the petulant and varied side of our characters, because it's easy to represent." Since this is what the poet represents in his or her writing and this is what people perceive, it can therefore be said that their work appeals to the unreasonable part of our character. Artists appeal to our irrational sides by representing something that can be altered to his discretion and poets by appealing to emotions which are far from reasonable. Upon reading poetry or viewing different forms of art, a relationship is created between the person and the art. This relationship, once again, is twice removed from the truth so all we are getting out of art is a false sense of truth or realization which predictably can deform any person for the worse. In conclusion, Plato thinks art needs to be censored by the state as there is nothing positive one can gain from it, not to mention it can corrupt people's moral values.

For the most part, I disagree with Plato's view on art. Violence is a topic that is often depicted in artworks, so take that as an example. It is crucial for a person to be able to distinguish between what is reality and what is mimesis or representation in art. Violent art works often get criticized for promoting a violent way of life or accused of influencing people to imitate what they see, but this is just not possible if one can distinguish between reality and representation. We will all experience some form of violence around us at one time or another, so why censor such a subject if it is part of the way of life? Art can indeed impose certain undesirable emotions, but that is part of the experience of art. Lets say we stare at a painting on the wall and feel nothing, then what is so special about that painting to call it art if it is analogous to staring at a wall. Where I do agree with Plato is when he talks about how impressionable and frugal people can fall victim to the false truth presented in art. This is especially the case with young children who want to watch movies with mature content, but this is exactly why the Motion Picture Association of America's film-rating system exists. However, when talking about children I believe it is in their parents' best interest to censor what they would not want their children to see. In my personal experience, my parents did not censor anything from me when I was younger because it was inevitable that I come across it one day or another, and this is the point I am getting at. Plato saw no importance in the role of art in the Republic, but did claim that art can negatively affect one's life because it is essentially a false representation of the truth, and should therefore be censored. While I understand how Plato came to say it is a false representation of said truth, I believe art plays a huge role in our lives and serves as an outlet for expressing ourselves whether it is in an abstract or mimetic manner. Sharing the experience of appreciation for a fine piece of art work unites people in agreement.