Sightings of the Soul

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In the Republic Plato presents images as shadowy yet effective. What beliefs could he have held about visual constructions that permitted both positions, as well as permitting the imagery used in philosophical arguments? The answer may lie outside the Republic. Two arguments in Book 10, both of which repeat a claim with a difference, point toward cultural contexts that complete the dialogue’s idea of images. 1. Socrates reproaches visual art with the ranking Form-of-bed/bed/bed-picture, then the ranking user-makerimitator. A flute-player or horseman replaces the god who made the Form. But the god who first used flute and bridle was Athena, and her unannounced presence here casts the pictures of flute and bridle as rebellion against the Olympian order. Mimêsis deploys a power not its own in rebellion against the governance that brings knowledge to humanity. 2. Book 10’s opening list of objects imitated is stated twice, the second time leaving out gods and dead souls. This repetition again suppresses the supernatural element, which was found in statuary that non-mimetically represented gods and souls. Plato’s dialogues acknowledge that element. The Republic’s own images for the soul are presented as sculptures. This is anti-iconic representation, as is the body’s signification of the soul. Here the omission of what is supernaturally effective signals what a proper use of visual art could be when visual art orients itself toward the world of the invisible. The deadly power in mimêsis comes of its rebelliousness against Olympian rule, while the power that art had before mimêsis was the result of its proper communication with gods and souls. Both times mimêsis presumes upon but fails to reproduce the divine effectiveness in art.