Plato, Republic, ed. John Burnet, 10.605

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

← Previous Next →

[605] 605a
παντάπασι μὲν οὖν.
ὁ δὴ μιμητικὸς ποιητὴς δῆλον ὅτι οὐ πρὸς τὸ τοιοῦτον τῆς ψυχῆς πέφυκέ τε καὶ ἡ σοφία αὐτοῦ τούτῳ ἀρέσκειν πέπηγεν, εἰ μέλλει εὐδοκιμήσειν ἐν τοῖς πολλοῖς, ἀλλὰ πρὸς τὸ ἀγανακτητικόν τε καὶ ποικίλον ἦθος διὰ τὸ εὐμίμητον εἶναι.
δῆλον.
οὐκοῦν δικαίως ἂν αὐτοῦ ἤδη ἐπιλαμβανοίμεθα, καὶ τιθεῖμεν ἀντίστροφον αὐτὸν τῷ ζωγράφῳ· καὶ γὰρ τῷ φαῦλα ποιεῖν πρὸς ἀλήθειαν ἔοικεν αὐτῷ, καὶ τῷ πρὸς ἕτερον τοιοῦτον 605b ὁμιλεῖν τῆς ψυχῆς ἀλλὰ μὴ πρὸς τὸ βέλτιστον, καὶ ταύτῃ ὡμοίωται. καὶ οὕτως ἤδη ἂν ἐν δίκῃ οὐ παραδεχοίμεθα εἰς μέλλουσαν εὐνομεῖσθαι πόλιν, ὅτι τοῦτο ἐγείρει τῆς ψυχῆς καὶ τρέφει καὶ ἰσχυρὸν ποιῶν ἀπόλλυσι τὸ λογιστικόν, ὥσπερ ἐν πόλει ὅταν τις μοχθηροὺς ἐγκρατεῖς ποιῶν παραδιδῷ τὴν πόλιν, τοὺς δὲ χαριεστέρους φθείρῃ· ταὐτὸν καὶ τὸν μιμητικὸν ποιητὴν φήσομεν κακὴν πολιτείαν ἰδίᾳ ἑκάστου τῇ ψυχῇ ἐμποιεῖν, τῷ ἀνοήτῳ αὐτῆς 605c χαριζόμενον καὶ οὔτε τὰ μείζω οὔτε τὰ ἐλάττω διαγιγνώσκοντι, ἀλλὰ τὰ αὐτὰ τοτὲ μὲν μεγάλα ἡγουμένῳ, τοτὲ δὲ σμικρά, εἴδωλα εἰδωλοποιοῦντα, τοῦ δὲ ἀληθοῦς πόρρω πάνυ ἀφεστῶτα.
πάνυ μὲν οὖν.
οὐ μέντοι πω τό γε μέγιστον κατηγορήκαμεν αὐτῆς. τὸ γὰρ καὶ τοὺς ἐπιεικεῖς ἱκανὴν εἶναι λωβᾶσθαι, ἐκτὸς πάνυ τινῶν ὀλίγων, πάνδεινόν που.
τί δʼ οὐ μέλλει, εἴπερ γε δρᾷ αὐτό;
ἀκούων σκόπει. οἱ γάρ που βέλτιστοι ἡμῶν ἀκροώμενοι Ὁμήρου ἢ ἄλλου τινὸς τῶν τραγῳδοποιῶν μιμουμένου 605d τινὰ τῶν ἡρώων ἐν πένθει ὄντα καὶ μακρὰν ῥῆσιν ἀποτείνοντα ἐν τοῖς ὀδυρμοῖς ἢ καὶ ᾄδοντάς τε καὶ κοπτομένους, οἶσθʼ ὅτι χαίρομέν τε καὶ ἐνδόντες ἡμᾶς αὐτοὺς ἑπόμεθα συμπάσχοντες καὶ σπουδάζοντες ἐπαινοῦμεν ὡς ἀγαθὸν ποιητήν, ὃς ἂν ἡμᾶς ὅτι μάλιστα οὕτω διαθῇ.
οἶδα· πῶς δʼ οὔ;
ὅταν δὲ οἰκεῖόν τινι ἡμῶν κῆδος γένηται, ἐννοεῖς αὖ ὅτι ἐπὶ τῷ ἐναντίῳ καλλωπιζόμεθα, ἂν δυνώμεθα ἡσυχίαν ἄγειν 605e καὶ καρτερεῖν, ὡς τοῦτο μὲν ἀνδρὸς ὄν, ἐκεῖνο δὲ γυναικός, ὃ τότε ἐπῃνοῦμεν.
ἐννοῶ, ἔφη.
ἦ καλῶς οὖν, ἦν δʼ ἐγώ, οὗτος ὁ ἔπαινος ἔχει, τὸ ὁρῶντα τοιοῦτον ἄνδρα, οἷον ἑαυτόν τις μὴ ἀξιοῖ εἶναι ἀλλʼ αἰσχύνοιτο ἄν, μὴ βδελύττεσθαι ἀλλὰ χαίρειν τε καὶ ἐπαινεῖν;
οὐ μὰ τὸν Δίʼ, ἔφη, οὐκ εὐλόγῳ ἔοικεν.

Republic. Plato. ed. John Burnet. Oxford. 1905.

Sponsored by Perseus Project, Tufts University.

Funding provided by The Annenberg CPB/Project.

Current edition Perseus

Πολιτεία (Greek) (Platonis Opera Tomus IV: Tetralogia VIII. Burnet, John, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1905.)

Translations (1)

Republic Perseus (Plato in Twelve Volumes, Vol. 5-6. Shorey, Paul, translator. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1935-37 (printing).) — 10.605 focus

[605] By all means. And is it not obvious that the nature of the mimetic poet is not related to this better part of the soul and his cunning is not framed¹ to please it, if he is to win favor with the multitude, but is devoted to the fretful and complicated type of character because it is easy to imitate? It is obvious. This consideration, then, makes it right for us to proceed to lay hold of him and set him down as the counterpart² of the painter; for he resembles him in that his creations are inferior in respect of reality; and the fact that his appeal is to the inferior part of the soul 605b and not to the best part is another point of resemblance. And so we may at last say that we should be justified in not admitting him into a well-ordered state, because he stimulates and fosters this element in the soul, and by strengthening it tends to destroy the rational part, just as when in a state³ one puts bad men in power and turns the city over to them and ruins the better sort. Precisely in the same manner we shall say that the mimetic poet sets up in each individual soul a vicious constitution by fashioning phantoms far removed from reality, and by currying favor with the senseless element 605c that cannot distinguish the greater from the less, but calls the same thing now one, now the other. By all means.
But we have not yet brought our chief accusation against it. Its power to corrupt, with rare exceptions, even the better sort is surely the chief cause for alarm. How could it be otherwise, if it really does that? Listen and reflect. I think you know that the very best of us, when we hear Homer⁴ or some other of the makers of tragedy 605d imitating one of the heroes who is in grief,⁵ and is delivering a long tirade in his lamentations or chanting and beating his breast, feel pleasure,⁶ and abandon ourselves and accompany the representation with sympathy and eagerness,⁷ and we praise as an excellent poet the one who most strongly affects us in this way. I do know it, of course. But when in our own lives some affliction comes to us, you are also aware that we plume ourselves upon the opposite, on our ability to remain calm and endure, 605e in the belief that this is the conduct of a man, and what we were praising in the theatre that of a woman.⁸ I do note that. Do you think, then, said I, that this praise is rightfully bestowed when, contemplating a character that we would not accept but would be ashamed of in ourselves, we do not abominate it but take pleasure and approve? No, by Zeus, he said, it does not seem reasonable.

Commentary

Commentary on Plato, Republic (Plato. The Republic, Vol 1-2. Adam, James, editor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1902-1903.) focus

πέφυκε τε ‐‐ πέπηγεν . It is easy to carry on the negative if we read τε and not γε, which is in all MSS except A^{1}. πέφυκε πρός, like πεποίηται πρός in 598 B, is here said of the relation of Art to that which it imitates, as appears from ἀλλὰ πρὸς—εὐμίμητον εἶναι. The word πέπηγεν means ‘is framed’ or ‘constructed,’ i.q. πεποίηται (598 B): cf. VII 530 D. The infinitive is the old datival infinitive of purpose ‘constructed for pleasing’ ‘to please’: see Goodwin MT. pp. 297, 310 f. Various unnecessary and unpleasing conjectures have been proposed: the addition of οὐ before τούτῳ (Stephanus), ἡ σοφία αὐτῷ τούτῳ ἀρέσκειν πέφυκεν (Cornarius Ecl. p. 102): the transposition of πέφυκε and πέπηγεν (Valckenaer on Eur. Phoen. 923 ): and οὐ τοῦ τούτῳ ἀρέσκειν πεπείνηκεν (Richter in Fleck. Jb. 1867 p. 147).

εἰ μέλλει ‐‐ τοῖς πολλοῖς . See on VI 493 D and cf. Reber Pl. u. die Poesie pp. 54—59.

οὐκοῦν δικαίως ‐‐ ζῳγράφῳ . See on 603 B.

μοχθηροὺς ‐‐ πόλιν κτλ. τούς is not required before μοχθηρούς any more than τούτοις after πόλιν (Herwerden's conjectures in Mn. XIX p. 340). With πολιτείαν—ψυχῇ cf. IX 590 E and X 608 B.

εἴδωλα εἰδωλοποιοῦντα κτλ. See cr. n. εἰδωλοποιοῦντα seems also to have been the reading of the first hand in Vind. F. The dative εἰδωλοποιοῦντι is retained by Schneider, who makes it agree with τῷ ἀνοήτῳ and regards ἀφεστῶτα as neuter plural. This interpretation, though grammatically tenable, is otherwise unsatisfactory. Plato (in 605 A) has just correlated Poetry with Painting because Poetry also a produces φαῦλα πρὸς ἀλήθειαν and b consorts with φαῦλόν τι τῆς ψυχῆς. On both grounds, he concludes, Poetry must be proscribed: for b τοῦτο ἐγείρει—τοτὲ δὲ σμικρά, and a εἴδωλα εἰδωλοποιεῖ. The chiastic sequence is usual in Plato. If we read εἰδωλοποιοῦντι, Plato assigns only one of his two main reasons for the exclusion of Poetry, viz. b, and the correspondence between this and the preceding sentence disappears. On this account Stallbaum and others are, I believe, right in restoring the accusative, and making ἀφεστῶτα, as well as εἰδωλοποιοῦντα, agree with τὸν μιμητικὸν ποιητήν. The error—an easy one after διαγιγνώσκοντι and ἡγουμένῳ — affected ἀφεστῶτα also in at least one MS, for Ξ has ἀφεστῶτι .

αὐτῆς . That is, τῆς ποιήσεως. Cf. VI 503 E note

τὸ γὰρ καὶ τοὺς ἐπιεικεῖς . See on 595 B.

τινὰ τῶν ἡρώων κτλ. Cf. III 387 D. In ῥῆσιν—κοπτομένους the contrast is between a ῥῆσις or set speech, spoken and not sung, “quales multae in tragoediis, Euripidis praesertim” (Casaubon apud Stallbaum), and κομμοί, which are sung. Hence ἢ καὶ—κοπτομένους, ‘or if you like singing and beating the breast,’ is perfectly accurate, and we ought not to change καὶ ᾄδοντας into κλάοντας or κλαίοντας (with Ast, Cobet, Baiter) or ᾄδοντας into ἀλύοντας (with Winckelmann). For ἢ καί cf. 599 A note The readings τινὰς—ὄντας—ἀποτείνοντας in q and some other MSS are only attempts to obliterate the common irregularity of a singular ( τινά etc.) passing into a plural: see on I 347 A. Richards ‘suspects’ that Plato wrote μιμουμένου—ἀποτείνοντος—κλαίοντος—κοπτομένου. The conjecture is as unnecessary as it is bold.

χαίρομεν κτλ. Pity, according to Aristotle, as well as Plato, is aroused by Tragedy: see Poet. 6. 1449^{b} 27. With συμπάσχοντες κτλ. cf. Arist. Pol. Θ 5. 1340^{a} 12 ἔτι δὲ ἀκροώμενοι τῶν μιμήσεων γίνονται πάντες συμπαθεῖς, and with ἐπαινοῦμεν — διαθῇ Laws 800 D ὃς ἂν δακρῦσαι μάλιστα τὴν θύσασαν παραχρῆμα ποιήσῃ πόλιν, οὗτος τὰ νικητήρια φέρει , Phil. 48 A τάς γε τραγικὰς θεωρήσεις, ὅταν ἅμα χαίροντες κλάωσι and Ion 535 E. See also on 606 B and III 395 D.

Plato Republic 10.605

ed. John Burnet

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

Current edition Perseus

Commentary

Stable identifiers