Aristotle’s view of literature as imitation, or mimesis, is a foundational concept in his philosophy of art and literature, particularly outlined in Poetics. For Aristotle, literature, along with other art forms like painting, sculpture, and music, is fundamentally an imitation of life. However, imitation for Aristotle does not imply mere copying or replication; instead, it is a process through which artists represent reality, offering insights into human nature, experiences, and universal truths. Aristotle’s concept of imitation goes beyond mere likeness, involving the artist’s creative interpretation and transformation of life, enabling audiences to understand and reflect on the deeper aspects of human existence.
Mimesis as the Basis of Art
Aristotle begins his discussion in Poetics by identifying humans as naturally imitative beings. He argues that from childhood, humans are inclined to learn and derive pleasure through imitation, an idea that forms the basis of art. According to Aristotle, imitation in literature and other arts is a natural and intellectual pursuit, through which humans understand the world and derive meaning from their experiences. This imitation encompasses not only the physical world but also emotions, actions, and events, capturing the complexity of human nature and society.
Unlike Plato, who criticized art for being twice removed from reality and therefore misleading, Aristotle sees imitation as a productive and enlightening process. Plato argued that artists only imitate the physical world, which he believed was already a flawed copy of the ideal Forms. In contrast, Aristotle considers mimesis as a means of accessing deeper truths. Through literature and art, audiences are exposed to representations of life that allow them to gain insights into universal themes and ethical values. For Aristotle, literature as imitation does not mislead but rather clarifies and illuminates the nature of humanity and reality.
Types of Imitation and Literature’s Unique Role
Aristotle’s concept of imitation in literature is complex and multifaceted. He distinguishes between different modes of imitation based on medium, objects, and manner. For example, the medium of literature is language, which can be used to imitate actions, characters, and events. Literature, according to Aristotle, is distinct in its ability to represent human life, emotions, and ethical decisions, aspects that are more challenging to capture in other art forms. Within literature itself, he identifies three primary genres—epic, tragedy, and comedy—each of which imitates different types of human actions and experiences.
In tragedy, imitation focuses on serious and elevated subjects, depicting noble characters and significant events that provoke emotions such as pity and fear, leading to catharsis. In comedy, imitation involves depicting the ridiculous and often laughable aspects of human behavior, presenting characters who are flawed but not evil. Epic poetry, like tragedy, deals with noble characters and significant events but usually spans a larger scope of time and action. Each genre, through its specific mode of imitation, allows audiences to explore distinct aspects of human nature and society.
Purpose and Function of Imitation in Literature
Aristotle sees imitation in literature as serving a vital purpose: to educate, entertain, and provoke thought. Literature, through its imitation of life, provides a way for audiences to contemplate human actions, moral choices, and the consequences of those choices. By presenting characters and situations that mirror real-life experiences, literature encourages readers to engage with complex ethical and philosophical questions. For instance, tragic literature can portray the inevitability of suffering and the consequences of human error, allowing audiences to empathize with characters and to understand the workings of fate, character, and choice.
The concept of catharsis is central to Aristotle’s view of imitation in tragedy. He argues that through the imitation of tragic events, audiences experience a purging or purification of emotions, particularly pity and fear. Watching a tragedy allows viewers to confront these emotions in a safe, controlled environment, leading to a psychological and emotional release. This cathartic effect highlights the therapeutic function of literature as imitation, providing audiences with a means to process and understand their own emotions and experiences in a transformative way.
Literature as a Reflection of Universal Truths
One of Aristotle’s most significant contributions to the understanding of literature as imitation is his belief that literature reveals universal truths. While historical accounts focus on particular facts and events, literature aims to represent general truths about human nature, behavior, and relationships. Aristotle argues that poetry is “more philosophical and more serious” than history because it deals with universal truths, not just specific incidents. In this way, literature as imitation allows readers to connect with universal human experiences, recognizing in characters and plots the shared aspects of humanity that transcend time and place.
By focusing on the universal, Aristotle emphasizes that literature has a moral and educational function, helping individuals explore and reflect on essential questions of life. For example, in a tragedy like Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex, the imitation of Oedipus’s journey uncovers themes of fate, guilt, and self-discovery, offering insights into the nature of human suffering and the limits of human knowledge. Through imitation, literature thus fosters an understanding of essential human dilemmas, encouraging audiences to engage with moral, philosophical, and existential questions.
The Role of the Poet as Creator and Interpreter
In Aristotle’s view, poets and writers are not merely passive imitators of reality but active creators who interpret and reshape life through their unique perspectives. He argues that the poet’s role is to select, order, and present events in a way that conveys meaning, even if this requires altering or embellishing real-life experiences. This creative aspect of imitation allows poets to reveal truths that might not be immediately visible in real life, capturing the essence of human nature through carefully constructed characters, dialogue, and plot.
Aristotle values the poet’s skill in arranging events to create a coherent and impactful narrative. This belief led to his principle of unity in plot structure, emphasizing that a successful imitation must have a beginning, middle, and end, with all parts contributing to a unified whole. This structure enables the poet to control the emotional and intellectual impact of the story, guiding audiences toward particular insights and responses. By shaping and refining their imitations, poets create a heightened version of reality that captures universal truths in ways that are more vivid and meaningful than real life itself.
Conclusion
Aristotle’s view of literature as imitation transformed the understanding of art’s role in society. For Aristotle, mimesis is not a simple act of copying but a profound and purposeful act of creation and interpretation that allows literature to reveal universal truths and provide emotional and moral insights. Literature’s capacity to imitate life enables audiences to engage with human experiences, explore ethical questions, and achieve catharsis through emotional engagement. By emphasizing the role of imitation in literature, Aristotle established a framework that recognizes art’s power to educate, enlighten, and elevate human understanding, making it an essential component of personal and social development. His concept of mimesis continues to influence literary theory, underscoring literature’s enduring relevance as a medium that reflects and shapes human experience.