This blog is part of a task given by Prof. Dr. D. P. Barad, based on the ResearchGate article titled “Aristotle’s Poetics” and the attached YouTube videos. I chose this topic to explore Plato’s views on artistic freedom and how his ideas still relate to modern-day controversies around banned films, books, and other creative works.
• Plato and His Views on Art
 |
Ancient mosaic of Plato teaching in his Academy From circa 1st-century BCE Pompeii, this mosaic represents Plato surrounded by students, highlighting his role as a foundational teacher |
Plato was one of the most important thinkers in the history of Western philosophy. He was born in ancient Athens around 427 BCE and was a student of Socrates, a well-known teacher who believed in questioning everything to reach the truth. Later, Plato became a teacher himself and founded The Academy, one of the earliest known institutions for higher learning in Europe. His most famous student was Aristotle. Plato wrote many philosophical texts in the form of dialogues, and in most of them, Socrates appears as the main speaker. One of his most influential works is The Republic, in which he talks about justice, politics, education, and the ideal state.
In The Republic, Plato also shares his strong opinions about art and literature. He believed that most forms of art, especially poetry and drama, were based on mimesis, which means imitation. According to him, artists do not create real truth , they only make copies of the physical world, which itself is already a copy of the ideal world of forms. So, for Plato, art is a copy of a copy, which makes it far from reality or truth. He was especially worried about how art could influence emotions and mislead people, especially the young. Emotional stories, heroic tales, and tragedies might look entertaining, but for Plato, they were dangerous because they could create false beliefs and distract people from reason and logic.
Because of this, Plato argued that in a well-ordered society, the government should carefully control or censor artistic works. He even suggested that poets and playwrights who create morally harmful or misleading content should not be allowed in the ideal state. His goal was not to destroy creativity, but to protect the minds and morals of citizens. These views might seem too strict today, but they come from his belief that the stability of society depends on truth, reason, and discipline ,not emotional illusions.
Plato’s main objection to art, especially literature and drama, was that it did not promote truth or knowledge. He believed that poets and playwrights appeal more to our emotions than to our reason, which makes their work both powerful and dangerous. In his view, when people get carried away by emotional stories, full of heroes, tragedies, romance, and revenge, they stop thinking rationally. Instead of learning real philosophy or practicing self-control, they become influenced by illusions. That is why Plato considered art as something that should not be given complete freedom in society.
Another major concern Plato had was about the moral impact of art. He thought that many works of literature and drama show gods behaving badly, heroes acting without responsibility, or people making selfish choices. According to him, this can set a bad example, especially for children and young people, who might copy such behavior. In The Republic, he said that stories in the ideal state should only promote good values, discipline, and truth. If art teaches the wrong lessons, it should be censored or even banned. He believed that the purpose of education is to create a just and moral citizen, and for that, all forms of learning, including art, must serve a clear and positive purpose.
Plato’s idea of censorship was not limited to just bad language or violence, but also included stories that confuse people, challenge traditions, or emotionally manipulate the audience. For him, the state had the right to decide what kind of art should be allowed, and what should be rejected. He did not support artistic freedom in the way we understand it today. Instead, he wanted art to be used as a tool to shape ideal citizens, people guided by logic, truth, and moral discipline. This is why many modern thinkers see Plato as the first philosopher to argue in favour of censorship in art and literature.
• Plato’s View on Art: Key Concepts and Influences
One of the most important terms to understand Plato’s view on art is mimesis, which means imitation. Plato believed that all art is an imitation of the physical world, which is itself an imperfect copy of the higher world of ideal forms. So, for him, art is a copy of a copy, and therefore far from truth. For example, a painter who paints a bed is only copying the physical bed, which is already just a copy of the ideal bed that exists only in thought. This made Plato feel that art cannot give us real knowledge, only illusions.
Another key idea is that Plato thought art had a strong effect on emotions, which he believed could be dangerous if not controlled. He was deeply influenced by the tragic plays of his time, like those by Homer, Euripides, and Sophocles. These plays were extremely popular in Athens and were known to move people to tears, anger, or pity. Plato felt that when people watched such performances, they lost control over their reason and became emotionally unstable. He believed this kind of emotional excitement could lead people away from truth and wisdom, and even weaken the moral structure of society.
Plato’s personal experiences also shaped his thoughts. He saw his teacher Socrates sentenced to death by a democratic court, possibly influenced by the emotions and opinions of the public. This made Plato deeply suspicious of anything that could manipulate people’s feelings, especially art, poetry, and drama. In his ideal society, he believed that only art which supports truth and virtue should be allowed. As he famously wrote in The Republic,
"Poets must be banished from the ideal state".
This quote may sound harsh, but it reflects Plato’s strong belief that art should not simply entertain, it should serve a moral and educational purpose.
• Aristotle’s Rebuttal: The Philosopher Who Defended Art
Aristotle was one of the greatest thinkers of the ancient world. Born in 384 BCE in Stagira, a city in northern Greece, he later moved to Athens and joined Plato’s Academy at the age of seventeen. He studied there for nearly twenty years, learning from Plato but also slowly developing his own unique perspective. While Plato focused more on ideal forms and moral discipline, Aristotle became more interested in real-life observations, nature, and logic. After Plato’s death, Aristotle left the Academy and went on to found his own school in Athens, the Lyceum, where he taught and wrote on a wide range of subjects, including philosophy, science, politics, ethics, and literature.
One of his most important contributions to the world of literature is his work Poetics, where he discusses the nature and function of tragedy. This text is often seen as a response to Plato’s harsh criticism of poetry and drama. While Plato believed that art misled people and stirred dangerous emotions, Aristotle took the opposite view. He argued that tragedy is not harmful, it is healing. According to him, watching tragic plays helps people release built-up emotions like fear and pity in a safe and healthy way. He called this emotional process catharsis. As Aristotle writes in Poetics,
“Tragedy is an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude... through pity and fear effecting the proper purgation (catharsis) of these emotions.”
-This quote is from Aristotle’s Poetics, Chapter 6 (Book VI) , where he defines tragedy.
A powerful example of this can be seen in Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex, a play Aristotle deeply admired. The story follows a noble king who unknowingly fulfills a terrible prophecy and ends up facing tragic consequences. Even though the plot is painful, it leaves the audience with a deeper understanding of human weakness, fate, and personal responsibility. Instead of being corrupted by the story, the audience experiences emotional clarity. In this way, tragedy becomes both emotionally and morally enriching.
Aristotle also believed that a well-written story should have a clear and logical structure, what he called the Unity of Action. A good tragedy, according to him, should have a single, focused plot where every event is connected by cause and effect. He praised plays like Oedipus Rex and Antigono for their tight structure and emotional power. Another key idea in Poetics is that of the tragic hero, a character of noble status who possesses a hamartia, or tragic flaw, which leads to their downfall. This flaw is not evil, but a human weakness or error in judgment, making the character more realistic and relatable. As Aristotle writes,
“The tragic hero is not perfectly virtuous and just, yet whose misfortune is brought about not by vice or depravity, but by some error or frailty.”
- This idea is found in Chapter 13 of Poetics, where Aristotle discusses what kind of character a tragic hero should be.
Through all these ideas, Aristotle defended the value of poetry and storytelling. For him, art was not just entertainment, it was a way to understand life, emotions, and human nature. Instead of banning poets as Plato suggested, Aristotle believed that poetry could teach, heal, and connect us with the deeper truths of existence. In short, where Plato saw danger, Aristotle saw meaning.
• Plato’s Fear in Today’s World: When Art Still Gets Banned
Even though Plato lived in ancient Greece, his ideas about the dangers of art still feel relevant today. He believed that poetry and drama could stir strong emotions, spread false ideas, and lead people away from truth and reason. Looking at today’s world, especially in the context of films, books, and TV shows that face protests, bans, or censorship, we can clearly see that Plato’s fear of art influencing public emotions and morality hasn’t disappeared. In fact, it has taken new forms in modern societies, including our own.
Padmaavat and the Fear of Fictional Influence
 |
| Movie poster of Padmaavat (originally titled Padmavati) – its controversy over historical portrayal and violent protests makes it a perfect modern example of Plato’s fear that art can deeply disturb society. |
One of the most well-known modern examples that reflects Plato’s concerns is the controversy around Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s film Padmaavat (2018). Even before the film was released, it faced massive backlash from groups like the Karni Sena, who believed it portrayed Rani Padmavati, a legendary Rajput queen, in an inappropriate or romanticized manner. Despite the filmmakers and censor board confirming that no such scenes existed, there were widespread protests, threats of violence, attacks on the film’s set, and even attempts to stop screenings across several states. Eventually, the title was changed from Padmavati to Padmaavat, and several cuts were made to the film. The fear that a fictional film could damage real history, mislead the public, or harm cultural pride, even without any factual distortion, strongly echoes Plato’s idea that mimesis (imitation) can emotionally disturb people and blur the line between truth and illusion.
 |
| Official poster of the film Udta Punjab (2016), which faced heavy censorship due to its portrayal of drug abuse in Punjab. The CBFC demanded over 40 cuts, including removal of the word “Punjab” reflecting modern fears that powerful art can damage a region’s image or influence public thought, just as Plato had warned. |
This wasn’t the only case. Other films like Udta Punjab (2016), which exposed drug abuse in Punjab, faced major censorship issues due to fears it would “damage the state’s image.” Lipstick Under My Burkha (2016) was initially denied release for being “lady-oriented” and “too bold,” showing how stories about gender and freedom can be viewed as dangerous. More recently, Laal Singh Chaddha (2022) faced online boycotts for being “anti-national,” based on unrelated past comments by its lead actor Aamir Khan. In all these cases, fictional stories were judged not just for artistic quality but for their emotional and social impact, exactly what Plato warned about when he said art can confuse and corrupt if not strictly guided.
Salman Rushdie and the Global Reach of Offense
 |
| The cover of Salman Rushdie’s controversial novel The Satanic Verses, banned in India in 1988 for allegedly hurting religious sentiments. The book became a global symbol of the debate over freedom of expression in literature. |
Another famous and much more serious example of artistic censorship is the case of Salman Rushdie’s novel The Satanic Verses (1988). The book was banned in India within weeks of its publication, as many considered its portrayal of certain religious themes to be blasphemous. The controversy quickly spread worldwide, leading to protests, riots, and book burnings in various countries. In 1989, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa calling for Rushdie’s death, forcing the author into hiding for years. Even decades later, in 2022, Rushdie was stabbed while preparing to speak at a literary event in New York, a chilling reminder of how deeply literature can provoke emotion and fear, just as Plato had warned.
This case is a striking example of what Plato feared most: the power of words to disturb public order, challenge traditional authority, and ignite uncontrollable emotional reactions. Despite being a work of fiction, the book was treated as a dangerous weapon, capable of influencing beliefs and behaviors on a massive scale. Similar controversies followed Taslima Nasreen’s Lajja, which was banned in Bangladesh and unofficially suppressed in India. Both authors faced exile and threats, proving that writers still suffer for their ideas, just as Plato feared when he argued that poets could mislead society and must be controlled.
When Books Are Silenced, Literature on Trial
Plato’s fear of emotionally powerful literature is not only seen in individual controversies, but also in the long history of banned or censored books, both in India and globally. Many important works of English literature have been challenged for being too bold, critical, or “immoral.” D. H. Lawrence’s Lady Chatterley’s Lover was banned for decades for its sexual content. James Joyce’s Ulysses faced legal battles for obscenity. Even George Orwell’s 1984 and Animal Farm were restricted or challenged in some countries for their political critiques.
In India, the pattern continues. Wendy Doniger’s The Hindus: An Alternative History was withdrawn from Indian bookstores in 2014 after legal pressure claimed it hurt Hindu sentiments. Rohinton Mistry’s Such a Long Journey was removed from the University of Mumbai’s syllabus in 2010 after protests from political groups. In many classrooms, works by Mahasweta Devi, Ismat Chughtai, and Saadat Hasan Manto have been avoided or censored because they address uncomfortable social realities, like caste, sexuality, or Partition violence. These bans and restrictions remind us that even today, literature can still make people uncomfortable, angry, or afraid, just as Plato believed it could.
• So... Was Plato Right ?
Plato’s concerns about the power of art can’t be dismissed easily. He feared that poetry, drama, and storytelling could mislead people, stir emotions, and even weaken society, and looking at the real controversies we've discussed, it’s easy to see where he was coming from. Sometimes, art really does provoke strong reactions. People feel hurt, angry, or threatened by what’s shown on screen or written in books. In such moments, Plato's call for censorship feels understandable, at least from the perspective of social safety and emotional stability.
But as a student of literature, I also find it difficult to fully agree with Plato. Art is not only about disturbing or misleading, it also educates, heals, and helps us think deeply. If every uncomfortable idea is banned, then how will we ever grow as individuals or as a society? Writers, filmmakers, and poets don’t always intend to offend, many of them are simply trying to hold up a mirror to society, or give voice to those who are usually silenced. Personally, as someone who enjoys writing and thinking creatively, I feel that too much censorship can kill originality. It can make artists afraid to speak, and that silence can be more dangerous than any work of art.
In the end, maybe the answer lies somewhere in between. Complete freedom without responsibility can be harmful, but controlling all art out of fear can be even worse. Art should challenge us, not just comfort us, and it should be protected, not punished, for doing so.
• Conclusion: Why Art Still Matters
From Plato’s deep mistrust of poetry to Aristotle’s passionate defense of it, the debate over the power of art has always been alive, and it still is. Today’s world may look different from ancient Greece, but the same questions remain: Should artists be allowed to express freely, even if it offends? Should society control what people can read, watch, or write? Through the controversies we’ve seen, from Padmaavat to The Satanic Verses, it’s clear that art still holds the power to move people, start conversations, and sometimes even spark outrage.
But maybe this is exactly what gives art its true value, it makes us feel deeply, think critically, and reflect on uncomfortable truths. Art brings hidden issues to the surface, speaks for those who are unheard, and often dares to say what many are afraid to. It can disturb us, yes but it can also heal, inspire, and bring clarity. That’s why art remains so important, even today. Whether we side with Plato’s caution or Aristotle’s trust in art’s power, one thing is clear: when we silence art, we silence voices, ideas, and even parts of ourselves.
Work Citation
“Aristotle’s Poetics.”
