Marco to ELEPHAS
> ELEPHANT TO MARCO (DEFENDING PLATO):
>
>
> MARCO WROTE:
> > Plato's point about art
> > was that it is "mimesis" (imitation) of reality. Reality is truth,
and art is
> > merely its copy. Aristotle's point was that it's possible to reach
the truth
> > by means of the logic.
> >
> > In both visions, the Good becomes a frill.
>
> ELEPHANT:
> A "frill"? I think not. In Aristotle's case, perhaps. But Plato had
more
> than just the one "point about art". Plato's theory of art is deep
and
> complex, centrally fixed around the very Prisigian idea that 'good' is
a
> noun: "Good is what every soul pursues and for which it ventures
> everything"[republic 505e]. Everything. Both the 'intellectual' and
the
> merely 'artistic'.
Yes, you are right. Actually, IMO the right sentence should be: "In both
visions, ART as tool for the seeking for Good becomes a frill".
Especially in Aristotle, I agree, but Plato prepared the path for
Aristotle's science.
> Iris Murdoch's discussion with Bryan Maggee does some
> justice to Plato's thought here (originally broadcast on the BBC and
now the
> accessible introduction to the extensive collection of papers
> *Existentialists and Mystics*, ISBN 0140264922). I recommend that you
read
> this, because it also sheds some light on the central issues for
MOQers.
> Murdoch spent most of her career thinking about just the issue which
first
> set Prisig going when he was a literature master: what is good art,
and what
> is it about good art that makes it good?
>
I thank you for your suggestions about Iris Murdoch. Up to now, only our
common friend Struan seemed to be a Murdoch's fan. I'll look for
something in Italian language.
[....]
> The important and intruiguing point made by Murdoch here is that for
Plato,
> copy making is not the only or most notable sin in art - distortion
and
> corruption in that copy making is. Copies are inferior ontologically,
not
> artistically: in art the only available distinction is between good
and bad
> copies. Plato prefers intellectual Philosophy-art to 'arty' art
because he
> sees it as a special, more disciplined, more austere, more
challenging, less
> self-indulgent, less attractively dreamy kind of copy-art than, say,
the
> theatre. The fact that the mass of people will pay good money to
attend Les
> Miserables, but are unlikely to spend their evenings reading Plato,
would
> seem to confirm this.
Don't you think that Plato would consider Les Miserables as "merely" a
copy of some "reality", and not being part of reality itself?
>
> Plato and the lesser variety of musical theatre are both Art.
I agree. Did Plato?
Let me know
Marco.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:55 BST