(Ancient Period: Pre-Socratic Greek Classics – Socrates – Plato – Aristotle - Plotinus; Medieval Period: Augustine - Aquinas )
Introduction
Western philosophy of art had its beginning in Greeks. Aesthetic thought was highly influenced by the philosophical content of the philosophers. The study of Western Aesthetics is incomplete without knowing the metaphysical and ethical position of the philosophers. Aesthetics in presocratic period is important because it forms the base for Socrates and his followers to ponder and determine the characteristic of art and the role of artists.
There were different forms of arts in Pre-Socratic period, such as poetry, drama, music and sculpture. Beginning from the two great epic poetry of Homer, viz., Illiad and Odyssey, many poets and dramatists have evolved during this period. Greeks had classified the drama as tragedy and comedy and enacted in their well-structured theatres. Some of the Greek tragedies are written by Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides. The Greek comedies written by Aristophanes and Menander are well known. During this period concepts like imitation and symbolism in the field of art has emerged. Only from the dialogues of Plato we get the development of ideas on the philosophy of art.
3.1. Socrates on Art and Artists
We shall find the idea of Socrates on art and the artist of his times from the Socratic dialectics as found in ‘Ion’, ‘Euthydemus’, ‘Greater Hippias’ and ‘Gorgias’.
‘Ion’ is a discussion on Rhapsody that takes place between Socrates and Ion, the Raphsode. Socrates through his dialectic method brings out the idea that poets compose since they are inspired and possessed and not by art. Socrates is of the view that the poet is moved by power divine and not by the rules of art. By this he derives that the poets do not bring out the work of art but work of God and that the poets are only interpreters of Gods. Poets, rhapsodes and audience all are inspired by God. Rhasodes are intermediaries; poets are closely linked to God’s inspiration and audience are the spectators. All are inspired by God but in their own right.
In the same dialogue further he arrives that every art is appointed by God to have knowledge of a certain work; thus God himself sets forth the differences in art. One without the knowledge of a particular art cannot have a right judgment of that art. In this dialogue, he arrives that the rhapsode is not an art but is a result of inspiration.
Secondly, in the following two dialogues, viz., ‘Euthydemus’ and ‘Greater Hippias’ we find his ideas on ‘Beauty’ and ‘beautiful things’. Socrates distinguishes, in the dialogue ‘Euthydemus’, the beautiful things perceived from the absolute beauty and observes that each of the perceived things has some beauty in it.
‘What is Beauty?’ is analyzed in the dialogue ‘Greater Hippias’. Hippias responses to this question in three ways, that is, beauty is a maiden, beauty is gold, that is, beauty is to be rich and respected, finally honorable death. Socrates response to what is beauty can be put in four ways, one that beauty is that which is appropriate, beauty is that which is useful and favourable, and finally he says, beauty is the pleasure that comes from seeing and hearing.
3.2. Plato’s Theory of Imitation
Plato emphasized the theory of imitation in his work ‘Republic,’ found especially in Book III and Book X. The foundation for the Platonic view on art and the artists is the theory of imitation strongly proposed by Socrates. In Book III, Music and Gymnastic, if rightly applied, were seen as builders of value in the young. In building an ideal state, Plato shows that young boys and girls who are expertise in music and gymnastic are to be selected as rulers. The poets, musicians and dramatists were seen as those who bring about harmful effects on the young.
Plato elaborates on the imitative principle in the art forms like poetry, painting etc., and thereby condemns art. Art imitates the empirical objects which are copy of the Forms. Thus, art is an imitation of the imitation. The artist is looked upon as one who imitates things and hence is a deceiver; an artist is concerned only to represent appearances and not reality itself. The artist is therefore said to be a collaborator in imagination. The perceived things are already an imitation of their forms and art is an imitation of imitation which takes one away too far from knowledge.
Plato points out the irrationality of art at every stage. According to him, imitative art is confined to partial copying of the objects of the phenomenal world, and its products are the objects of sense-perception and arouse passion and feelings, which he categorizes as hedonistic like his predecessors. He concludes that due to the imitative and hedonistic nature, art does not strengthen the mind but on the other hand corrupts the mind. He declares the exclusion of art and artists in building an ideal republic.
But he did not entirely reject or be indifferent towards art; he recommends art for satisfaction of sensuous desires. He allows art only when it is strictly regulated. Thus, scholars classify the Platonic theory on art as ‘rigoristic hedonism’.
3.3.Aristotle’s Doctrine on Katharsis (Purification or Cleansing)
Aristotle examines the theory of imitation as propagated by his teacher. ‘Imitation’ as the common feature of the fine arts, including poetry, was first formulated by Plato. Aristotle has not dealt with the philosophy of art distinctly like other sciences. But he deals with poetry and drama. There are some ideas that we derive from his Poetics that forms the foundation of the development of all later theories of art.
Poetry, Drama and Music are conceived as modes of imitation. But they differ in three respects, viz., the medium, the object and the manner of imitation. The differences of the arts with respect to the medium of imitation are rhythm, tune and metre. The objects of imitation are men in action who are categorized with moral differences. Which follows that the representation must be either better than real life, worse or as it is. A third difference is the manner in which each of these objects may be imitated. Thus, it can be concluded that the medium, the objects and the manner are the three differences which distinguish the artistic imitation.
Imitation is one instinct of our nature and second pertains to the rhythm. In this sense, Tragedy is an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude, in language beautified (language into which rhythm, harmony and song enter). The aim of tragedy, Aristotle writes, is to bring about a "catharsis" of the spectators — to arouse in them sensations of pity and fear, and to purge them of these emotions so that they leave the theatre feeling cleansed and uplifted, with a heightened understanding of the ways of gods and men. Thus, every Tragedy must have six parts – namely, Plot, Character, Thought, Diction, Spectacle, Song.
Plot – is the imitation of action. Plot here means arrangement of incidents or structure. Plot is the first principle, as it were the soul of a Tragedy.
Character – is the virtues ascribed to the agents of action. It holds the second place in Tragedy. It reveals moral purpose, showing what kind of things a man chooses or avoids.
Thought – is that where something is proved to be or not to be, or a general maxim in enunciated.
Diction – the expression of meaning in words. It is Song that beautifies the tragedy.
Spectacle - means having the character of entertainment; worthy of special notice; or having a emotional attraction of its own. So far, the parts of the Tragedy which must be treated as elements of the whole has been mentioned.
Aristotle makes seven final remarks about how a poet should go about constructing a plot: (1) The poet should be sure to visualize the action of his drama as vividly as possible. This will help him spot and avoid inconsistencies. (2) The poet should even try acting out the events as he writes them. If he can himself experience the emotions he is writing about, he will be able to express them more vividly. (3) The poet should first outline the overall plot of the play and only afterward flesh it out with episodes. (4) Every play consists of desis, or complication, and lusis, or denouement or unravelling (undoing or solving). Desis is everything leading up to the moment of peripeteia,[1] and lusis is everything from the peripeteia onward. (5) There are four distinct kinds of tragedy, and the poet should aim at bringing out all the important parts of the kind he chooses. First, there is the complex tragedy, made up of peripeteia and anagnorisis;[2] second, the tragedy of suffering (pathetic); third, the tragedy of character (ethical); and fourth, the tragedy of spectacle. (6) The poet should write about focused incidents, and not about a whole epic story. For instance, a tragedy could not possibly tell the entire story of the Iliad in any kind of satisfying detail, but it can pick out and elaborate upon individual episodes within the Iliad. (7) The chorus should be treated like an actor, and the choral songs should be an integral part of the story. Too often, Aristotle laments, the choral songs have little to do with the action at all.
Tragedy and Epic poetry fall into the same categories with a few differences between them. First, an epic poem does not use song or spectacle to achieve its cathartic effect. Second, epics often cannot be presented at a single sitting, whereas tragedies are usually able to be seen in a single viewing. Finally, the 'heroic measure' of epic poetry is hexameter, where tragedy often uses other forms of meter to achieve the rhythms of different characters' speech.
Aristotle also lays out the elements of successful imitation. The poet must imitate either things as they are, things as they are thought to be, or things as they ought to be. The poet must also imitate in action and language (preferably metaphors or contemporary words). Errors come when the poet imitates incorrectly - and thus destroys the essence of the poem.
Aristotle concludes by tackling the question of whether the epic or tragic form is 'higher.' Most critics of his time argued that tragedy was for an inferior audience that required the gesture of performers, while epic poetry was for a 'cultivated audience' which could filter a narrative form through their own imaginations. Aristotle argues that tragedy is, in fact, superior to epic, because it has all the epic elements as well as spectacle and music to provide an indulgent pleasure for the audience. Tragedy, then, despite the arguments of other critics, is the higher art for Aristotle.
Aristotle on art and art experience: ‘Art imitates nature’ is the famous phrase of Aristotle. He differentiates art as fine art and useful art. Fine art, he says, is a free and independent activity of the mind, outside the domain both of religion and of politics, having an end distinct from that of education or moral improvement. But we cannot say that fine art is a copy or reproduction of natural objects.
Useful art or technique is concerned with the skills and methods of practical subjects such as manufacture and craftsmanship. Useful art normally refer to invention. The word ‘Nature’ here significantly brings out the meaning of ‘art’ as useful art. Here, Nature means not the outward world of created things, but it is the creative force, the productive principle of the universe. It is this inner vital or productive principle that is at work in the nature. This is very much evident in the self-cure of the nature. Aristotle says in his De Anima that “Nature aims at producing health; in her restorative processes we observe an instinctive capacity for self-curing”. Nature as an art is an imitation of perfection and art exists to complete what nature created imitating the perfect without finishing.
Nature is subject to limitations that can best make use of the available material. Nature needs more assistance in carrying out its designs in the ascending scale of being towards its own perfection. By means of the rational faculty of art, that is endowed to human being richly by nature, the human – the highest in the scale of beings, comes to the aid of nature through useful art. When nature fails, art steps in.
3.4.Medieval Aesthetic Thought
Plato, Aristotle and Plotinus have considerably influenced the thought of the middle age thinkers with regard to the aesthetic thought. The middle age is found to be predominantly in the analysis of the notion of beauty. Scholastic school of thought places God as the absolute beauty and creation of God as the beautiful. In The Divine Names, Pseudo-Dionnysius refers to God as Beautiful. He greatly influenced later St. Thomas Aquinas who in his Summa Theologica takes up the study of the sense of beauty.
The aesthetic currents are found in the medieval period covering the early Christian era and the Renaissance. Let us see influential thinkers of the medieval period beginning from St.Augustine highlighting the concept of beauty.
3.4.1. St. Augustine
The medieval age is marked by the beginning of St. Augustine. Highly influenced by the Platonist and Neo-Platonist thought, we find his views related to philosophy of art in his autobiographical work The Confessions.
By using the words ex nihilo and ex material, he distinguishes the creation of God and the human creation, that of the artists. Augustine held nature superior, as creation of God that forms the material for the artists. Unlike Plato, he found a kind of truth in the poetic compositions.
He considered False as that which tends to be what it is not. In this connection, he divides falsehood into two, one as the deception brought about by nature and two, the deception carried by the living beings.
The deception by the living beings he further classifies as practical and deliberate illusions and deceptions only to amuse. He distinguishes the poetic or the artistic falsity as the deceptions for amusement. Hence, he does not favour the idea of Plato that poets are liars or flatterers. The intention of the artists, says Augustine, is not to deceive.
He mirrors the view of Plotinus when he says God’s beauty emanates to nature in the act of creation. Initially, he says, matter was formless ‘without any beauty’ and describes a hierarchy of beautiful things. He recognizes the evil in the line of beauty. Thus, ugly finds a place in the description of art by Augustine. For him, that which is ugly serves as the medium to bring beauty prominently and contrasts thereby contributing to the effectiveness of beauty. This can be achieved, according to Augustine, if the ugly is placed in right and proper relation to the beauty.
In his work De Musica, he maintains that rhythm originates with God. He explicates that rhythm is eternal which needs to be discovered. He emphasizes the need for enquiry into the nature to discover the eternal rhythm. Augustine claims that rhythm is like math; it can only be discovered by people. Rhythm is already determined in God, and human beings cannot invent it. This is likened to the theory of recollection propounded by Plato. In the work Of True Religion, Augustine points out that the order is the key element of beauty and an orderly arranged is the beautiful.
3.4.2. St. Thomas Aquinas
In the question on whether goodness has the aspect of a final cause, Aquinas highlights that goodness is praised as beauty and beauty has the aspect of a formal cause and hence goodness has the aspect of a final cause. In this argument, we derive that Aquinas does not differentiate the Good and Beauty. In establishing the efficient cause, he reveals that the basic principle of goodness is its perfection. He arrives that beauty belongs to the nature of formal cause in the following manner:
1) Beauty and goodness in a thing are identical as they are based on the same Form.
2) Since goodness is praised as beauty, they are one and the same, but goodness is only logically different from Beauty, because goodness has the aspect of final cause and beauty formal cause.
3) Goodness has the aspect of an end; Beauty relates to the cognitive faculty and the beautiful things are those which please when perceived.
4) Hence, beauty consists in due proportion; for the senses delight in things duly proportioned like every cognitive faculty.
5) Since proportion relates to form, Beauty appropriately belongs to the nature of a formal cause.
In dealing with the question ‘whether god wills evils’, he describes the view of St.Augustine according to whom out of all things is built up the admirable beauty of the universe, wherein even, that which is called evil, properly ordered and disposed, commends the good. For him, God wills that appertains to the perfection and beauty of the universe. It means that evil in as much as appertains to perfection of the universe, evil is willed by God. While Augustine positions evil in the line of beauty, Aquinas argues that it refers to the intermediary cause.
Aquinas takes up the argument on ‘whether god can do better than what he does’. He resorts to the position of Augustine that each thing that God has created is good, and taken all together they are very good, because in them all consists the wondrous beauty of the universe. Beauty is the key element to substantiate that the creation of God is good.
Thus, we find in the work Summa Theologiae, St. Thomas Aquinas conducts a study of beauty drawn from the ideas revealed by his predecessors. To surmise, for Aquinas, the origin of beauty is sensuous that are capable of contemplation. He restricts this capacity to the sense of sight and sense of hearing. Hence, he defines beauty in Aristotelian terms as that which pleases solely in the contemplation of it. He identifies three prerequisites of beauty, viz., perfection, appropriate proportion, and clarity.
[1] Peripeteia is a sudden reversal of fortunes or change in circumstances.
[2] Anagnorisis is a certain moment in a play in which a principal character recognizes or discovers another character’s true identity or the true nature of their own circumstances.