Mimesis

Mimesis

===Nature creates similarities. One need only think of mimicry. The highest capacity for producing similarities, however, is man’s. His gift of seeing resemblances is nothing other than a rudiment of the powerful compulsion in former times to become and behave like something else. Perhaps there is none of his higher functions in which his mimetic faculty does not play a decisive role. ===

Definition
Mimesis comes from the Greek root, meaning to imitate (more so meaning representation than copying). Plato defined art as being part of a world of ideas that is created by God, all of the concrete things man perceives in his existence is a shadowy representation of this ideal type.[1]

Uses
Mimesis can be used as a technique within art. All art is in essence mimetic as it is only able to capture the abstract concept of an idea. All artists of any form are twice removed from the original when trying to represent their own form of an idea through another medium visually, orally, aurally, etc.

We call something an imitation - mimesis - when we seem to perceive something where - in fact, on closer view - there is either nothing (representations, memories, hallucinations, dreams) or something else (a mirror, marble, painted canvas, printed paper). Particularly apparent is the case of visual imitation.[2]

History
Both Plato and Aristotle thought that mimesis was a representation of nature. Plato eventually used imitation as applicable to painting, sculpture, and poetry. As culture in those days consisted in both reading and the listening to performances, the recitals of orators and poets, or the acting out by classical actors of tragedy, a t first he called “imitative” only poetry in which, as in tragedy, the heroes speak for themselves (epic poetry describes and does not imitate, he said).[3] Later, beginning with Book X of the Republic, his conception of art as imitating reality grew very extreme: "he saw it as a passive and faithful act of copying the outer world."[3] He later grew to reject his original sentiments as he began to believe that imitation such as art is not the proper path to truth, being a recreation of the truth.

Plato maintained in his critique that theatre was not sufficient in conveying the truth. Both Plato and Aristotle adhered to the belief that artistic imitation may present things either more or less beautiful than they are;...it can and ought to limit itself to their characteristics which are general, typical, and essential.[3] Aristotle preserved the thesis that art imitates reality but imitation meant to him not faithful copying but a free and easy approach to reality; the artist who imitates can present reality in his own way.[3] Aristotle stated that artistic imitation presented things either more or less beautiful than they are, and rather misrepresented things. He then decided that mimesis should only really apply to nature, as nature is the source of perfection. It was his belief that there needed to be a distance between the art form and life. We are able to learn from mimetic devices such as tragedy because there is catharsis in imagined pain and the empathy we employ as means of imagination; imagination provides a way for us to interpret others perspectives at a distance.

In modern times, mimesis has nearly been forgotten. Modern critics are not opposed to the theory that art relies on nature, but maintain that art imitates nature. Art can be construction, expression, and for others, imitation. Modern art doesn't try to imitate the appearance of things, and there is still some debate over how mimesis is still used. In ways many of the artists and poets we have studied have provided examples of mimesis.

Examples
[|Tender Buttons] Gertrude Stein represents an abstract form of poetry that is both baffling and beautiful. Through the use of mimesis, she brings the objects in //Tender Buttons// to a new level of reality. For example; in "Careless Water," she is writing about a cup, and the water being added to the cup. The cup will always be the same cup, regardless of the water being in it or not. She uses otherwise undervalued objects to make statements about emotion, the world, or just life in general. Each poem can be interpreted in many ways, and can be anything the reader needs it to be. She imitates human feelings but lets them be expressed through simple objects and ideas. This dffers from personification because she doesn't make the objects act human, they just have the ability to feel. She explores the question: why can't an object feel or think?

//The Student// (1919)



Pablo Picasso's abstract expression of a student in this 1919 production uses several distinct shapes and lines to induce the reader into forming a concept of a person within the painting. The title also creates a frame of reference for which we see the painting, priming the viewer to complete the image themselves. Mimesis works many times in conjunction with indeterminacy, in poetry and visually, as in particular to this painting. The lines towards the top half have a distinctly facial like structure, a mere imitation of a person, yet we are unsure as to the rest of the body's structure.

//Interventionist Demonstration// (1914), Carlo Carrà



This piece is mimetic of any particular number of concepts. Knowing this is a resemblance of something, we the viewer must place our own value judgements as to what this could be. This is where the literal and figurative come together as the literal shapes, colors, and words are used to represent a much different image. At first interpretation this resembles an explosion or crater of sorts; the concentric circular pattern and lines that could be extending from the center bring to mind an eruption from the core.

//Apres La Marne//, F.T. Marinetti



The mimetic use of words in this piece represent not only the words that are used but physical structures as well. Apres La Marne was created during a tumultuous era of war in Europe, the use of French language alludes to this, and this is supposed to represent the chaos of war. The large M, A, V, and S shapes represent the physical shape of mountains and rivers and the words themselves interspersed can be interpreted as representing the people who primarily speak the language, or that country's people.

Marcel Duchamp's //Fountain// (1917)

The intent with the piece was to shift the focus of art from physical craft to intellectual interpretation. in this case one does not simply take the art at face value; this is in fact a urinal but we are meant to understand what the artist intends to highlight by taking this form out of it's normal context. Most important is the branding of the piece, we are being lead by the artist at first glance due to the name given, //Fountain//.

Images are used in accordance with fair use practices. If you hold copyright to an image, and do not agree that its use accords with fair use practices, please contact the wiki's creator and organizer.

-[]

[]

=Works Cited=

[|1.] Puetz, Michelle. "Mimesis." //Index//. University of Chicago, Winter 2002. Web. 29 Feb. 2012. .

[|2.] Bayst, Stefan. "Mimesis:reconsideration of an Apparently Obsolete Concept." //Http://d-sites.net///. Stefan Bayst, Nov. 2005. Web. 29 Feb. 2012. .//

[|3.] Tatarkiewicz, W//. "University of Virginia Library."// Dictionary of the History of Ideas//. Charles Scribner's Sons. Web. 29 Feb. 2012. .