Plato’s Argument: Art is an Imitation of an Imitation

Abstract
Plato’s concepts of art and aesthetics encompass the core elements of his philosophical principles. Specifically, Plato shows how art becomes an imitation of an imitation: a clear reference to the philosopher’s concept of forms. Within Plato’s philosophy of art being nothing more than an imitation of an imitation is a value judgment, because Plato proposes that anything that is an imitation is also something that distracts and distorts reality. In other words, art can adversely impact the human ability to use reason. However, art served a fundamentally different purpose in ancient Greece than it does in the twenty-first century. Plato’s philosophy of art and aesthetics can seem anachronistic in light of the role art plays in postmodern society. When viewed in light of the role art played in ancient Greece, though, Plato’s philosophy of art showcases the logic behind the allegory of the cave in the Republic. Essentially, art can be little more than an imitation of an imitation when it remains derivative and unconscious of the political import of human creative acts.
Introduction
Every person has at some point viewed art that is little more than an imitation: works that depict scenes from daily life, portraits, still life scenes, or landscapes. Even when art becomes imbued with emotional intensity or is executed well, elevating the senses to appreciation, awe and wonder, it is still little more than entertainment. Plato considered art in this way: as something frivolous at best and at worst, even dangerous due to its ability to distract the mind from what is true and real (“Plato,” n.d.). According to Plato, then, beauty can only be located in the truth. Art can lead the person to contemplate and appreciate aesthetic beauty, but can never lead the person to truth. 
Furthermore, art is defined by its being created by human beings. Human beings already have a distorted sense of reality. In Plato’s Republic, the philosopher relays his concept of the Forms. Using the allegory of the cave, Plato shows how the majority of what the human mind perceives is a distortion of reality. The allegory showcases a group of people in a cave who become fascinated by the shadows dancing on the wall instead of venturing outside the cave to discover the source of the shadows: the sun and the light that refracts off of physical objects. A person who does leave the cave to perceive the truth may be ostracized from society, but at least that person possesses great power in knowing the truth about reality. 
Using this same analogy of the cave and the shadows created by the sun, art would be like cave drawings. Plato wants his audience to understand that art is an imitation of an imitation. Like the child’s game of telephone, the root message becomes distorted when it is filtered through successive layers of consciousness. Plato believes in the existence of an absolute truth that is independent of the human mind, and suggests that the human mind mistakes illusion for reality. Becoming overly wrapped up in aesthetics can lead a mind astray from the core goal of philosophy: which is to discern the truth.
For Plato, the job of the philosopher is to venture outside of the cave. Venturing outside of the cave means sacrificing the shared reality of the shadows on the wall in favor of knowing the truth. Therefore, Plato assumes an antagonistic role towards art. Anything that comes in the way of the truth is akin to lying, which makes it unethical. In Plato’s worldview, art can therefore be seen as unethical given that it is an imitation of an imitation.  Plato disregards other aspects of artistic expression such as the inherent value of art, art for art’s sake, or the sheer pleasure that art can provide to the artist and the audience. 
Yet there is no evidence that conceptual art existed at all in Plato’s time. If all art is merely imitative, then surely it could be argued that it leads the mind away from more intellectually fruitful activities like seeking the truth. Plato had not begun to consider the role that aesthetics or art can play in alternative epistemological frameworks. Using Plato’s cave allegory, the philosopher who wishes to enlighten the group of people living in the cave could communicate the truth about the Forms by returning to the cave and using art to depict the entire situation: the existence of the sun, the way light creates shadows, and the fact that the world outside the cave is more real than the dancing shadows on the wall. Plato also did not consider the multiple media of art, or the fact that literature, poetry, and music as well as the visual arts can all lead a person to the truth. Especially since art can serve as a means to subvert rigid social norms and irrational political structures, Plato may come to view art in a more positive light. Some art will remain an imitation of an imitation but when art becomes politically aware and rendered in the service of the truth, it would conform more to Plato’s lofty philosophical standards. Within the Greek philosopher’s limited perspective of art or of art’s role in society, Plato did believe that art is nothing more than an imitation of an imitation.
Body
To properly understand Plato’s philosophy of art as an imitation of an imitation, it becomes critical to review the allegory of the cave and the corresponding theory of Forms. In Plato’s Republic, a group of people are being held prisoner in a cave. All they know of reality consists of what they see in the dim light of the cave. They see shadows dancing on the walls and do not realize that the shadows are not actual objects. Stuck in a child’s mentality, the prisoners never realize that there is a whole world outside of the cave. The prisoners also do not realize that it is the sun that casts the shadows as light refracts off of objects in space. 
Using the allegory of the cave in the Republic, Plato suggests that most human beings are prisoners like those in the story. Until a philosopher or truth-seeker breaks the bonds of mental imprisonment by exiting the cave, all people remain mired in darkness and ignorance. Not knowing the truth is not evil in and of itself, but it certainly can be considered factually wrong. Plato is therefore summarily concerned with truth. 
Given Plato’s philosophical obsession with truth as the ultimate goal of intellectual activity, it makes sense that the philosopher would criticize any mindset that mistook the shadows on the wall for reality. It also stands to reason that the philosopher would likewise criticize any attempt to pass off imitations of those shadows. Art within the cave is nothing more than an imitation of the shadows on the wall. It can distract the prisoners and prevent them from venturing outside the cave, which could even make art seem like an obstruction of the truth.
Of course, Plato does not acknowledge that it is imprisonment that is the real problem preventing the people from discerning the truth. Yet Plato’s point is not to make a political statement about freedom but to show that art is a futile endeavor unless it can be shown to enlighten or to bring a person to the truth. If Plato knew that some art does indeed have the capacity to shed light on hidden truths that lie outside of the cave, then the philosopher might have developed a more sympathetic view towards art. 
In ancient Greece, the arts did flourish. Artistic renditions of the human form and of historical events continue to capture audiences thousands of years later. As aesthetically pleasing as ancient Greek art is and was, it did not serve the political function that art serves in a postmodern world. Plato can therefore be easily forgiven for assuming that art is nothing but an imitation of an imitation given the historical context of his philosophy. In Plato’s time, aesthetics—beauty—was not considered part of the philosopher’s realm (Pappas, 2016). Aesthetics as a branch of philosophy only emerged in the modern era. The deeper consideration of the ethical and political value of art did become a hallmark of modern life, eventually leading to the concept of art for art’s sake. In fact, Plato’s view of art as an imitation of an imitation explains why audiences only value original works of art even when an imitation is similar in almost every way (Brook, 2008). The difference between the copy and the original is that the original is the truth.
For Plato, beauty is truth and truth is beauty. Plato values beauty but only values art insofar as it is subservient to the truth. In a world in which art is not necessarily beautiful at all, art certainly does communicate essential Forms and ideas. Plato did not know a world in which art meant anything but decoration or skillful rendition. Art that communicates lofty concepts still does not necessarily lead the audience to the truth.
Looking beyond the Republic and the allegory of the cave, Plato did avow the potential of art and aesthetics to point to the truth. Plato extolled the virtues of multiple forms of art including music and poetry, and recognized the ethical value of beauty as well (“Plato,” n.d.). When Plato claims that art is an imitation of an imitation, the philosopher warns against ignorance and illusion. Far from being a diatribe against art and aesthetics, Plato’s philosophy is one that urges the artist to take responsibility for the power of creative media. Plato seemed to understand precisely the power and potential of art to serve a political purpose: to further entrench the prisoners into the illusions of the cave. 
Considering the corpus of Plato’s work and especially his dramatic portrait of the trial of Socrates in the Apology, the philosopher’s warning about the illusory nature of art becomes even clearer. When a person with political power realizes the captive audience in the cave, art can be used as a form of propaganda to secure obedience and suppress critical thinking and reason. Plato’s criticism of art as being an imitation of an imitation is linked to the fact that art can become propaganda: a meaningless message that reinforces ignorance and sheepish obedience to false truths and false prophets. In the Apology, the enemies of Socrates mistake dogma for truth. Socrates shows that their gods and their religion are but illusions: imitations of the real truth. As beautiful as religion, tradition, and cultures can be, their rituals and folkways should not become rigid. Rituals and art, however beautiful, are no substitute for truth, ethics, and justice.
In fact, art often serves to bolster the power of religion or politics. Even in ancient Greece, long before the emergence of the Catholic Church and other globally influential organizations commissioned grandiose works of art to propagate their dogma, art was used for the solidification and perpetuation of power. The temples of ancient Greece are in fact part of the aesthetic body Plato refers to when the philosopher critiques art as a poor imitation of the truth. The masses mistake the beauty of the temple for the reality of the cosmos. Similarly, the masses mistake the dogma of their religion for the power of human reason. Socrates speaks in favor of reason over religion and is killed for it in the Apology. Plato also decries the way art can be used to distract and numb the public, which allows the public to be easily manipulated.
It is not so much that Plato is against art or undervalues aesthetics in any way. On the contrary, Plato does acknowledge the importance of beauty as a Form (Pappas, 2016). Even the most splendid work of art is still but an imitation of what the artist truly wants to say, much in the same way language never fully conveys the deepest sentiments of the speaker. Human beings should always strive to understand more and to seek the truth rather than remain satisfied with amusing shadows on the wall.
Conclusion
Plato provides a consistent and controversial theory of art. Art is an imitation of an imitation, according to the Greek philosopher. Most of what human beings think they know ends up being but a shadow of the real truth. The unfolding of scientific knowledge and inquiry has dispelled countless illusions, just as the philosopher exposes the shadows on the wall for what they really are. While art can lead a person to contemplate and seek the truth, it can never actually be ultimate reality.
References
Brook, E. (2008). Art imitating art. https://contempaesthetics.org/newvolume/pages/article.php?articleID=516
Pappas, N. (2016). Plato’s aesthetics. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2008. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/plato-aesthetics/
Plato. Apology. Translated by B. Jowett. Retrieved from: http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/apology.html
Plato. Republic. Translated by T. Sheehan. Retrieved from: https://web.stanford.edu/class/ihum40/cave.pdf
“Plato,” (n.d.). Retrieved from: http://users.rowan.edu/~clowney/Aesthetics/philos_artists_onart/plato.htm