Talk:Mimesis/Archive 1

Archive 1

comment

I would petition for an inclusion of Homi Bhabha's definition of mimesis in his work "Of Mimicry and Man: The Ambivalence of Colonial Discourse." This discussion could perhaps dovetail with the addition of Girard's philosophic contribution to mimetic ideology. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.190.36.244 (talk) 20:11, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Why is the work of René Girard not mentioned in this article? He's provided one of the best analyses of mimesis available.

Well, enter it then. That is what it is all about. We, as Wikipedians complete what is missing in an article. Please feel free to supplement a René Girard section. Many thanks. Dieter Simon 00:09, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Why is "represents" consistently typed as "re-presents" in this article? Clayhalliwell 14:01, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Because it means "presents anew" rather than "represents", a perfectly valid spelling of something that isn't quite the same. Dieter Simon 00:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Well then, if it's such a key distinction then it should probably be replaced with less ambiguous, less "cutesy" terminology. Clayhalliwell 19:35, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Cutesy, eh? Any decent dictionary will point you to its meaning. If you are going to query the word, please enter its correct equivalent, but not "represent", which is not its equivalent. Dieter Simon 01:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to contradict you, but 'represent' is a valid translation of 'mimesis' and the sense of re-presenting something is idiosyncratic to media studies. See, for example, Stephen Halliwell's translation of Aristotle's Poetics (Chapel Hill: U of North Carolina P, 1986). He argues that ‘Representation’ is closest to the "meanings covered by the mimesis word-group in Greek. Thus a picture can represent a subject, an actor represent a character, a play represent an action, event or story" (71).

Along with Girard (who I'd say is a crucial omission here), sections on the Frankfurt School's development of the term would be useful (Walter Benjamin's 'On the Mimetic Faculty', Theodor Adorno's Aesthetic Theory and Dialectic of Enlightenment); Also contemporary feminist re-workings (Irigaray comes to mind, as does Elin Diamond's Unmaking Mimesis). I know, I know, do it yourself then is an appropriate response, and when I get the time I'd like to contribute what I can, but I thought it worthwhile to flag up some of the crucial omissions in the article as it stands.

DionysosProteus 16:06, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Looks good, DionysosP., why don't you have a go and fill the gap in the article with the section you feel needs to be in the article? Dieter Simon 00:01, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Poets v. philosophers

The following sentence and what follows it is confusing (and could also stand a citiation): "In Book I and II of his Republic Plato argues that poets have no place in the ideal state, and that a philosopher ought to hold the highest role as Philosopher King..." Is this what Plato actually "argues" in The Republic? Where exactly? He is the author of The Republic, true; but if I remember the work correctly, there are two primary interlocutors and Socrates; the entire work is executed in a dialogue with some narration by Socrates. But why should we assume Plato is a mouthpiece for Socrates? There has been much scholarly debate over the assumption that Plato's philosophical position is represented here at all, be it in the words of Socrates or any of the other interlocutors for that matter. Nor can it be assumed that Plato's philosophical "position" can be gleaned from what the dialogues produce: namely, the Ideal Society (which is actually [and ironically] a totalitarian distopia). It ought to be noted that the current summary in the Wiki is only one "reading" (and a sloppy one at that) of The Republic and there is really no evidence to support it, or the thesis that Plato is making an "argument" here at all. I think it's unfortunate that this assumption is so often repeated as fact that few people even bother reading Plato's works with the scrutiny they deserve. I'm writing this here and not on the main page because I'm new to Wikipedia and still need to learn the editing rules and the appropriate way and place to contest that statement. Figured I'd start here. --Maria617 02:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Maria, I am looking into this as it does need checking. Will come back and possibly re-edit. Dieter Simon 00:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Dieter, I look forward to seeing this page evolve.--Maria617 03:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Disambiguation

Hi, LtPowers, according to your edit summary, are you intending to enter some kind of template into this? Quote = Disambiguation link repair - You can help = Unquote. Unless you do, this is probably not going to go anywhere. It will disappear out of sight. Won't it? See history of article. Dieter Simon 22:39, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Erich Auerbach needs a hyperlink here - he is the expert we seek.

Requesting clarification on the Sculpture example...

...which reads:

"In sculpture, mimesis mirrors the plasticity of an image an onlooker has with which he can empathize within a given situation. In Rodin's The Kiss, for example, the protective arms of the male and seeming trustfulness of the female figure enclosed within her partner's limbs, down to the stance of their feet, is a position all humans would recognize immediately in that the trust and truth that permeates the erotic element of the statue is that which is entailed in the relationship of any man and woman in a similar situation."

How is "plasticity" being used here, given the instances of plasticity in art (w.r.t. Mondrian, or to the physical characteristic of the medium being used in the work--the only two occurances I've come across here)? I'm wondering about this notion of "mirror[ing] the plasticity of an image an onlooker has... ." Is "plasticity" then a condition or qualtiy imparted to the viewer of a piece?

Rbenari 16:41, 28 March 2007 (UTC)rbenari

What almost certainly is meant here is the three-dimensional plasticity of sculpture, as in the Plastic arts where materials are involved which are moulded in such a way that they call forth the kind of recognition and empathy in the spectator as described. Dieter Simon 23:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Non sequitur?

In the Aristotle section this statement reads to me like a non sequitur:

Aristotle argued that literature is more interesting as a means of learning than history, because history deals with specific facts that have happened, and which are contingent, whereas literature, although sometimes based on history, deals with events that could have taken place, or ought to have taken place.

If it's just me not getting it, perhaps someone would be so kind as to attempt an elucidation on this argument? __meco 08:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Proust's "oral" emotion

I have no idea what is meant by "oral emotion" in this context, and the link to a disambiguation page does not bring light on this puzzle either. This isn't central to understanding what is expounded, nevertheless, any examples provided should still be easily comprehensible. __meco 09:01, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Incomprehensible Freud

Mimesis as opposed to catharsis are two basic notions on which Freud relies to explain the psychological intricacy of the relation between the author and his work, the hero and the reader/spectator as the process of literary creation is akin to that of dreaming awake.

Aside from noting the sentence being grammatically erroneous I still cannot comprehend the jumble of objects in this sentence. Also the meaning of catharsis here, in this context seemingly arbitrarily mentioned, eludes my comprehension. __meco 09:11, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

poetics

you should have goven us a more detailed analysis —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.88.252.28 (talk) 08:19, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

The representation of nature

Why is mimesis limited to representation of nature and not, for example, states of soul or something alike? When somebody mimics something then mainly other people and their appearances. At least for Plato. And there is another more ontological meaning where mimesis mimics ideas -- but still not nature. Would this nature be physis in Greek? I think at least Plato never talks about mimesis of physis. Yes, he sais, mimesis can form a second physis or nature for people... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.40.5.245 (talk) 20:05, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

What is he meaning of the prompt "this article is in need of attention"

Can someone point to the meaning of "this article is in need of attention" as per prompt in the article. Is it because you can't understand what the text says, or do you think it is unnecessarily complicated and therefore needs simplification? Where does the expert aspect come into it? It has a slightly complex definition but doesn't mean that an expert can make it easier for you to understand. Some concepts are complex and you can't make them less so by leaving certain aspects out, only to make a child understand what is after all a fairly difficult subject. Please clarify the prompt. Dieter Simon (talk) 02:17, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Have removed the Walter Kaufmann reference for reasons given while editing article

Have removed the following citation re Walter Kaufmann:

"Walter Kaufmann in Tragedy and Philosophy Ch.II suggests that we translate mimêsis in Aristotle’s Poetics as “make-believe”."

Have removed this as it means very little just sitting there as it was. A statement such as this needs further substantiation within the context of the whole article. What in fact did he actually refer to as 'make-believe', what exactly was it in chapter II that made him say so. Please re-enter this with the relevant details that would make the citation clearer. A block-quote might help here. Dieter Simon (talk) 01:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Recent re-vamp of article

I've just done a substantial cleanup, so thought I'd explain some of the decisions here. I've removed the section on artistic creation and that on Freud. The material under theatre, sculpture, music, etc. was unsourced and pretty debatable at best. Rather than mislead, I decided to cut. As indicated in a previous talk post (see archive), the material on Freud was damn-near incomprehensible. The general gist seemed to be a parallel between literary creation and dreaming, but the material was too garbled for me to be able to re-write more clearly. I've gathered all the classical definitions and debates into one section. Since the ludology reference seems to be using the word in the same way that film studies uses diegesis, I've grouped those together. I have also removed the expert tag, because although the article still requires lots of development, at least the material now presented is all sourced and correct (so far as I can tell). DionysosProteus (talk) 14:48, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

is article "Mimesis" a copy?

Have moved following to the bottom of the discussion being a new section:

is this article plagiarised from the following link, or vice versa? substantial chunks of text are the same: http://www.diffen.com/difference/Aristotle_vs_Plato —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.253.64.173 (talk) 14:28, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

The "diffen" website is also one where anyone can edit. As you must know there are many mirror sites which can and do copy our articles and the website cited very probably claim to be a free encyclopedia (I haven't gone into this, but it does invite you edit the site), so I can't see that we can do anything about it.Dieter Simon (talk) 00:58, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Mimesis and Literary Theory

It seems incomplete to jump from Aristotle to Irigaray. Mimesis has been used in many important texts in between those thinkers. Sidney and Coleridge stand out as good examples of Modern theorization of mimesis. I'd like to build a section incorporating the ideas of one or both of those figures. Thoughts? Baxtalo4 (talk) 02:38, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Please do, we welcome valuable contributions. The article needs more modern examples.Dieter Simon (talk) 01:43, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Coleridge is a good addition, but I am amazed that Auerbach is only mentioned in passing here. I read him over 30 years ago and I'm not really wanting to re-read him at the moment, so I wouldn't venture to write about his ideas, but many of his ideas have stuck with me after decades, including the differences at different times of what parts of human experience are even considered worth writing about. - Jmabel | Talk 18:59, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I can understand that. So, if anyone wants to complement what we have on Auerbach, of course, with sources. Here is your chance. Dieter Simon (talk) 01:32, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Section on Plato needs re-conceiving

I am concerned about the section on Plato in this article because it discusses what Plato says, but not what he means. In doing so, I believe it completely mis-states Plato's ideas about mimesis. The greatest part of the Plato citations here are from Republic, where Plato has Socrates quote various poets over and over and over again, and this is a clear sign that Plato does not actually oppose imitation categorically. Furthermore, everything that Plato wrote is in dialogue form, which is itself a form of imitation. There does seem to be, for Plato, a right way to imitate (and consequently some wrong ways to imitate as well), but this does not even begin to come across in the Plato section as it is now. I would have re-written that section myself, but I'm far more well-versed in Plato than Wikipedia writing. 199.89.180.254 (talk) 21:16, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Recent additions

There were some recent additions here that I've removed. If someone wants to make an attempt to better integrate them into the article, have at it. Frankly I don't see how these add to the article: a long bibliography, mostly in Italian, and a report on one Italian educational research facility that happens to attach the name "mimesis" to their techniques. Salvador Minuchin I'm iffy on. I'm not familiar with his work but this seems to be a minor aspect of his theories as it doesn't even have a mention at Structural Family Therapy. I've included the removed sections below for reference. Cheers, Lithoderm 14:05, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Salvador Minuchin

Salvador Minuchin developed Structural Family Therapy (SFT) in the 1960s. One of Minuchin's SFT techniques is the process of "joining" that occurs between the therapist and the family. Mimesis is one of four ways to accomplish joining with a family. Mimesis is becoming like the family in the manner or content of their communications, adjusting behavioral style to fit that of the family. The therapist does this by using similar interpersonal styles and language as the family, such as joking with a jovial family or using the same metaphors that family members use. (Snow, Crethar, Robey, and Carlson 2005: 137–40).

Mimesis. Pedagogy of Expression

«To make oneself similar, in voice and/or gesture, to someone or something» (Republic 393c ff.) Plato thus defines what is "doing the mimesis" (mimeisthai).

Mimesis is described by Plato in “The Republic” as the dynamism that enables education.

If a man becomes a citizen beautiful, good and right, or if one fails in this endeavour, seems to depend only on how and by what he will do mimesis.

The “making oneself similar”, which characterizes mimesis, can be external or internal, superficial or profound, may apply to the appearance of the other or to something that truly is in the other.

This activity takes place, albeit with different characteristics depending on the age, in the spontaneous play of children born anywhere in the world. This simple observation makes clear the universality and naturalness of this human possession.

The potentialities of mimesis in education are the subject of study and research in Italy by the Laboratory of Pedagogy of Expression of the Department of Educational Design of the University “Roma Tre”.

The research activities of MimesisLab are developed in three distinct areas which work in synergy: philosophy of education, experimental pedagogy, artistic production.

From this research emerges as a qualified re-consideration of mimesis in educational process enables the individual to express his/her own radical originality and to participate in the construction of a coexistence based on attention to the needs and happiness of each one. This finding open essential pathways for intercultural education, peace education, education for empathy.

Bibliography

• ADORNO, THEODOR W., Teoria estetica, Torino, Einaudi, 1977.
• AGOSTINO, Le confessioni.
• ALIGHIERI, DANTE, Convivio.
• ARONADIO, FRANCESCO, Platone Resp. 509 d-511 e: la chiarezza dei contenuti cognitivi e il sapere diretto, in “Elenchos”, Bibliopolis, Napoli, 2006, 27 (2), pp. 409-424.
• ASMIS, ELIZABETH, Plato on poetic creativity, in Kraut, Richard (a cura di), The Cambridge companion to Plato, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992, pp. 338-364.
• ARISTOTELE, De anima.
• ARISTOTELE, Metafisica.
• IARISTOTELE, Poetica.
• ARISTOTELE, Politica.
• BAUMAN, ZYGMUNT, Modernità liquida, Laterza, Bari, 2002.
• BELFIORE, ELIZABETH, A theory of imitation in Plato’s Republic, in “Transactions of the American Philological Association”, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1984, 114, pp. 121-146.
• BEIL WAUGH, JOANNE, Art and Morality: The End of an Ancient Rivalry?, in “Journal of Aesthetic Education”, University of Illinois Press, Champaign, 1986 (Spring), 20 (1), pp. 5-17.
• BENJAMIN, WALTER, Angelus Novus. Saggi e frammenti, Einaudi, Torino, 1995.
• BOGGIO, MARICLA, Il Corpo Creativo. La parola e il gesto in Orazio Costa, Bulzoni, Roma, 2001.
• BOGGIO, MARICLA, Mistero e Teatro. Orazio Costa, regìa e pedagogia, Bulzoni, Roma, 2004.
• BOGGIO, MARICLA, Orazio Costa maestro di teatro, Bulzoni, Roma, 2007.
• BRUMBAUGH, ROBERT S., A retracted exile?: poetry and Republic 614b2, in “Ancient philosophy”, Methesis Publications, Pittsburgh, 1992, XII, pp. 172-173.
• BUFFIERE, FELIX, Les mythes d’Homère et la pensée grecque, Les Belles Lettres, Paris, 1956.
• BÜTTNER, STEFAN, Psychologie und Poetik bei Platon: Argumente für die Einheit der Platonischen Dichtungstheorie, in “Antike und Abendland”, De Gruyter, Berlin, 2001, 47, pp. 41-65.
• COHEN, TOM, Anti-mimesis from Plato to Hitchicock, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1994.
• COLLI, GIAN GIACOMO, Una Pedagogia Dell'Attore. L'insegnamento di Orazio Costa, II ed. riv. e acc., Bulzoni, Roma, 1996.
• COSTA GIOVANGLI, ORAZIO, Dell’analogia mimica come base del¬l’interpretazione scenica, in Colli, Gian Giacomo, Una Pedagogia Dell'Attore.

L'insegnamento di Orazio Costa, II ed. riv. e acc., Bulzoni, Roma, 1996.

• DESCLOS, MARIE LAURENCE, Idoles, icônes et phantasmes dans le dialogues de Platon, in “Revue de métaphysique et de morale”, Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, 2000, 3, pp. 301-327.
• DERRIDA, JACQUES, La farmacia di Platone, Jaca Book, Milano, 2007.
• DIES, AUGUSTE, Introduction, in Platon, Œuvres complete, Tome VI, La République, livres I-III, Les Belles Lettres, Paris, 1947.
• DILLEY, ROY, Ways of Knowing, Forms of Power, in “Cultural Dynamics”, University of Texas, Austin, 1999, 11 (1), pp. 33-55.
• DINAPOLI, FRANCESCA, La “Paideia” nel progetto politico di Platone, in “Orpheus”, Università di Catania - Centro di Studi sull’An¬tico Cristianesimo, Catania, 2005, N. S. 26 (1-2), pp. 89-103.
• DIXSAUT, MONIQUE (a cura di), Études sur la République de Platon, Vrin, Paris, 2005.
• DUCCI, EDDA, Essere e comunicare, Anicia, Roma, 2002.
• DUCCI, EDDA, Approdi dell’umano. Il dialogare minore, Anicia, Roma, 1999.
• DUCCI, EDDA, L’uomo umano, Anicia, Roma, 2008.
• DUCCI, EDDA, La parola nell’uomo, La Scuola, Brescia, 2005.
• DUCCI, EDDA, Libertà liberata. Libertà Legge Leggi, Anicia, Roma, 1994.
• DUNCAN, ISADORA, Lettere dalla danza, La casa Usher, Firenze, 1980.
• DUNCAN, ISADORA, L’Arte della Danza, a cura di Eleonora Barbara Nomellini e Patrizia Veroli, L’Epos, Palermo, 2007.
• DYKMAN, AMINADAV, ET GODZICH, WLAD (a cura di), Platon et les poètes, Unité de littérature comparée - Faculté des Lettres - Université de Genève, Genève, 1996.
• DYSON, MICHAEL, Poetic imitation in Plato Repubblic 3, in “Antichthon”, Macquarie University - Australian Society for Classical Studies, Sydney, 1988, 22, pp. 42-53.
• EARLE, BO, Plato, Aristotle, and the imitation of reason, in “Philophy and Literature”, The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 2003, 27 (2), pp. 382-401.
• ELSE, GERALD F., ‘Imitation’ in the Fifth Century, in “Classical Philology”, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 53 (2), 1958, pp. 73-90
• ELSE, GERALD F., The structure and the date of book 10 of Plato’s Republic, Abhandlungen der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, Heidelberg, 1972.
• FABRO, CORNELIO, La nozione metafisica di partecipazione, S. E. I., Torino, 1963.
• FATTAL, MICHEL (a cura di), La philosophie de Platon, 1, L’Harmattan, Paris, 2001.
• FINK, EUGEN, Fenomeni fondamentali dell’esistenza umana, Edizioni ETS, Pisa, 2006.
• FISCHER, FRACK, Qu’est-ce qu’une expérience “aisthétique” selon Platon?, in “Dialogue”, Wilfrid Laurier University Press, Waterloo, 2003, 42 (1), pp. 27-52.
• FREEDBERG, DAVID, ET GALLESE VITTORIO, Movimento, emozione, empatia. I fenomeni che si producono a livello corporeo osservando le opere d'arte, in “Prometeo”, Mondadori, Milano, 2008, 26 (103), pp. 52-59 (trad. it. dall’articolo del 2007: Motion, emotion and empathy in esthetic experience, in “Trends in Cognitive Sciences”, 11, pp. 197–203).
• FRONTEROTTA, FRANCESCO, Il problema della methexis: a proposito di un lungo dibattito platonico. In “Elenchos”, Bibliopolis, Napoli, 1999, 20 (2), pp. 397-415.
• GADAMER, HANS G., Studi platonici, ed. it. a cura di Giovanni Moretto, Marietti, Casale Monferrato, 1983.
• GADAMER, HANS G., L’attualità del bello. Studi di estetica ermeneutica, a cura di Riccardo Dottori, Marietti, Genova, 1986.
• GADAMER, HANS G., Verità e metodo, a cura di Gianni Vattimo, Bompiani, Milano, 1983.
• GALLESE, VITTORIO, Empathy, embodied simulation, and mirroring mechanisms. Commentary on “Towards a neuroscience of empathy” by Doug Watt, in “Neuropsychoanalysis”, International Neuropsychoanalysis Society, London, 2007, 9 (2), pp. 146-151.
• GALLESE, VITTORIO, Embodied simulation: from neurons to phenomenal experience, in “Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences”, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 2005, 4, pp. 23–48.
• GALLESE, VITTORIO, Before and below ‘theory of mind’: embodied simulation and the neural correlates of social cognition, in “Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B”, Royal Society Publisching, London, 2007, 362, pp. 659-669.
• GALLESE, VITTORIO, Corpo vivo, simulazione incarnata e intersoggettività: Una prospettiva neurofenomenologica, in Cappuccio, Massimiliano (a cura di), Neurofenomenologia, Bruno Mondadori, Milano, 2006, pp. 293-326.
• GALLESE, VITTORIO, Il corpo teatrale: mimetismo, neuroni specchio, simulazione incarnata, in “Culture Teatrali”, I Quaderni del Battello Ebbro, Porretta Terme (Bo), 2008, 16, pp. 13-38.
• GALLESE, VITTORIO, ET MIGONE, PAOLO, ET EAGLE, MORRIS N., La simulazione incarnata: i neuroni specchio, le basi neurofisiologiche dell’intersoggettività e alcune implicazioni per la psicoanalisi, in “Psicoterapia e Scienze Umane”, FrancoAngeli, Milano, 2006, XL, 3, pp. 543-580.
• GASTALDI, SILVIA, Mimesis e psyche nel Libro X della Repubblica, in Migliori, Maurizio, et Napolitano Valditara, Linda M., et Fermani, Arianna, Interiorità e anima, la psychè in Platone, Vita e pensiero, Milano, 2007, pp. 109-122.
• GASTALDI, SILVIA, Paideia/mythologia, in Platone, La Repubblica, trad. e commento a cura di Mario Vegetti, vol. II, libro II-III, Bibliopolis, Napoli, 1998, pp. 333-392.
• GASTALDI, SILVIA, La mimesis e l’anima, in Platone, La Repubblica, trad. e commento a cura di Mario Vegetti, vol. VII, libro X, Bibliopolis, Napoli, 2007, pp. 93-149.
• GAUDREAULT, ANDRÉ, Mimèsis et diègèsis chez Platon, in “Revue de métaphysique et de morale”, Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, 1989, 94, pp. 79-92.
• GEBAUER, GUNTER, ET WULF, CHRISTOPH, Mimesis. Kultur, Kunst, Gesellschaft, Rowohlt, Reinbeck, 1992.
• GENTILE, GIOVANNI, Manuale di pedagogia come scienza filosofica, V ed. riv., Sansoni, Firenze, 1955.
• GIULIANO, FABIO MASSIMO, Filosofia versus poesia: Platone davanti a un’antica disputa, in Arrighetti, Graziano (a cura di), Letteratura e riflessioni sulla letteratura nella cultura classica: atti del convegno, Pisa, 7-9 giugno 1999, Giardini Editori e Stampatori in Pisa, Pisa, 2000, pp. 377-400.
• GIULIANO, FABIO MASSIMO, Platone e la poesia: teoria della composizione e prassi della ricezione, Academia Verlag, Sankt Augustin, 2005.
• GIRARD, RENÉ, La violenza e il sacro, Adelphi, Milano, 1980.
• GOLDMAN, LAURENCE, Child’s play: mith, mimesis and make-believe, Berg, Oxford, 1998.
• GRAHAM, VICKI, “Into the Body of Another": Mary Oliver and the Poetics of Becoming Other, in “Papers on Language and Literature”, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville, Edwardsville, 1994, September 22, 4 (30), pp. 352-372.
• GOMPERZ, THEODOR, Platone, in Pensatori greci, III, La Nuova Italia, Firenze, 1953.
• HALLIWELL, STEPHEN, The aesthetic of mimesis. Ancient texts and modern problems, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2002 (trad. it., L’estetica della mimesis. Testi antichi e problemi moderni, a cura di Giovanni Lombardo, trad. di Daniele Guastini e Loriana Maimone Ansaldo Patti, Aesthetica, Palermo, 2009).
• HASKINS, EKATERINA VALERI CHUGAEVA, Mimesis between poetics and rhetoric: performance culture and civic education in Plato, Isocrates, and Aristotle, in “Rhetoric Society Quartely”, Penn State University - Rhetoric Society of America, University Park, 2000, 30 (3), pp. 7-34.
• HAVELOCK, ERIC ALFRED, Cultura orale e civiltà della scrittura. Da Omero a Platone, Laterza, Roma-Bari, 1973.
• HEIDEGGER, MARTIN, L’origine dell’opera d’arte, a cura di Gino Zaccaria e Ivo De Gennaro, Marinotti, Milano, 2000.
• HORN, CHRISTOPH, ET RAPP, CHRISTOF, Intuition und Methode: Abschied von einem Dogma der Platon – und Aristoteles – Exegese, in “Philosophiegeschichte und logische Analyse”, Schöningh, Paderborn, 2005, 8, pp. 11-14.
• IRWIN, TERENCE H., Art and philosophy in Plato’s dialogues, in “Phronesis”, Brill, Leiden, 1996, 41 (3), pp. 335-350.
• JAEGER, WERNER, Paideia. La formazione dell’uomo greco, La Nuova Italia, Firenze, 1959.
• JANAWAY, CHRISTOPHER, Images of Excellence: Plato's Critique of the Arts, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1998.
• JOUSSE, MARCEL, L'antropologia del gesto, Edizione Paoline, Roma, 1979.
• JOUSSE, MARCEL, La manducazione della parola, Edizione Paoline, Roma, 1980.
• JOUSSE, MARCEL, Le Parlant, la Parole et le Souffle, Gallimard, Paris, 1978.
• KARDAUN, MARIA, Der mimesisbegriff in der griechishen Antike: Neubetrachtungen eines umstrittenen Begriffes als Ansatz, zu einer neuen Interpretation der platonischen Kunstauffassung, North Holland, Amsterdam, 1993.
• KIRBY, JOHN T., Mimesis and diegesis: foundation of aesthetic theory in Plato and Aristotle, in “Helios”, Texas Tech University Press, Lubbock, 1991, 18, pp. 113-128.
• KOLLER, HERMANN, Die mimesis in der antike. Nachahmung, Darstellung, Ausdruck, Francke, Berna, 1954.
• KOSMAN, LOUIS ARYEH, Silence and imitation in the Platonic dialogues, in Klagge, James C., et Smith, Nicholas D. (a cura di), Methods of interpreting Plato and his dialogues, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1992, pp. 73-92.
• LESZL, WALTER GABRIELE, Plato's Attitude to Poetry and the Fine Arts and the Origins of Aesthetics, Part I, in Études Platoniciennes I, Les Belles Lettres, Paris, 2004, pp. 113-197; Part II, in Études Platoniciennes II, Paris, 2006, pp. 285-351; Part III, in Études Platoniciennes III, Paris, 2007, pp. 247-334.
• LI VOLSI, ROCCO, La dottrina platonica del linguaggio, in “Sapienza”, Ed. Domenicana Italiana, Napoli, 2004, 57 (4), pp. 427-447.
• LIDDELL, GEORGE HENRY, ET SCOTT, ROBERT, Greek-English Lexikon, Claredon Press, Oxford, 1996.
• MAMARY, ANNE J., Redeeming Mimesis, in “Méthexis”, Academia Verlag, Sankt Augustin, 2001, 14, pp. 73-85.
• MARCHAND, TREVOR H. J., Muscles, morals and mind: craft apprenticeship and the formation of person, in “British Journal of Educational Studies”, Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Oxford, 2008 (September), 56 (3), pp. 245–271.
• MATTEI, FRANCESCO, Sfibrata paideia. Bulimia della formazione Anoressia dell’educazione, Anicia, Roma, 2009.
• MELBERG, ARNE, Theories of mimesis (Literature, Culture, Theory), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995.
• MERLEAU-PONTY, MAURICE, La prosa del mondo, trad. it. Marina Sanlorenzo, Editori Riuniti, Roma, 1984.
• MICALELLA, DINA, Platone e la voce del pubblico, in De Martino, Francesco, et Sommerstein, Alan H. (a cura di), Lo spettacolo delle voci, Levante Editore, Bari, 1995, pp. 117-129.
• MIGLIORI, MAURIZIO, Lo schema onto-epistemico della linea. In “Elenchos”, Bibliopolis, Napoli, 2006, 27 (2), pp. 459-484.
• MIGLIORI, MAURIZIO, ET NAPOLITANO VALDITARA, LINDA M., ET FERMANI, ARIANNA, Interiorità e anima, la psychè in Platone, Vita e pensiero, Milano, 2007.
• MITSCHERLING, JEFF, Plato’s misquotation of the poets, in “Classical Quarterly”, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2005, N. S. 55 (1), pp. 295-298.
• MONDOLFO, ROBERTO, Il pensiero antico. Storia della filosofia greco-romana, La Nuova Italia, Firenze, 1961.
• MUCKELBAUER, JOHN, Imitation and invention in antiquity: an historical-theoretical revision, in “Rhetorica”, University of California Press, Berkeley, 2003, 21 (2), pp. 61-88.
• MULLER, ROBERT, La musique et l’imitation, in Fattal, Michel (a cura di), La philosophie de Platon, 1, L’Harmattan, Paris, 2001, pp. 103-137.
• MURRAY, PENELOPE, Inspiration and mimesis in Plato, in Barker, Andrew, et Warner, Martin (a cura di), The language of the cave, Academic Printing and Publishing, Edmont, 1992, pp. 27-46.
• NADDAF, GÉRRD, Literacy and poetic performance in Plato’s “Laws”, in “Ancient Philosophy”, Duquesne University - Department of Philosophy, Pittsburgh, 2000, 20 (2), pp. 339-350.
• NADDAFF, RAMONA, Exiling the poets: the production of censorship in Plato’s “Republic”, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2002.
• NIETZSCHE, FRIEDRICH, La genealogia della morale, in Opere filosofiche, vol. II, in Classici della filosofia, Utet, Torino, 2003.
• OLIVER, MARY, American primitive, Little, Boston, 1983.
• PAXSON, THOMAS D. JR., Art and Paideia, in “Journal of Aesthetic Education”, (Special Issue: Paestum and Classical Culture: Past and Present), 1985 (Spring), 19 (1), University of Illinois Press, Champaign pp. 67-78.
• PLATON, Œuvres completes, Tome VI, La République, livres I-III, trad. Emile Chambry, Les Belles Lettres, Paris, 1947.
• PLATON, Œuvres completes, Tome VII, I partie, La République, livres IV-VII, trad. Emile Chambry, Les Belles Lettres, Paris, 1956.
• PLATON, Œuvres completes, Tome VII, II partie, La République, livres VIII-X, trad. Emile Chambry, Les Belles Lettres, Paris, 1957.
• PLATON, Dialoghi filosofici, a cura di Giuseppe Cambiano et Francesco Adorno, in Classici della Filosofia, Utet, Torino, 1970-1988.
• PLATON, Tutte le opere, a cura di Enrico V. Maltese, Newton Compton, Roma, 1997.
• PLATON, La Repubblica, trad. it. e cura di Mario Vegetti, BUR, Milano, 2007.
• PLATON, La Repubblica, trad. e commento a cura di Mario Vegetti, Bibliopolis, Napoli, 1998-2007.
• PLATON, La Repubblica, trad. it. a cura di Franco Sartori, Bari, Laterza, 1999.
• PLUTARCO, Vite, Classici Utet, Torino, 1992.
• PROIMOS, CONSTANTINOS, Reading Platonic and Neoplatonic notions of mimesis with and against Martin Heidegger, in “Scripta classica Israelica”, Israel Society for the promotion of classical studies, Jerusalem, 2002, 21, pp. 45-55.
• RABASSINI, ANDREA, L’analogia platonica tra il Sole e il Bene nell’interpretazione di Marsilio Ficino, in “Rivista di storia della filosofia”, FrancoAngeli, Milano, 2005, 60 (4), pp. 609-629.
• RANGOS, SPYRIDON, Proclus on poetic mimesis, symbolism, and truth, in “Oxford Studies in Ancient philosophy”, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1999, 17, pp. 249-277.
• RASMUSSEN, BJØRN, Beyond imitation and representation: extended comprehension of mimesis in drama education, in “Research in Drama Education: The Journal of Applied Theatre and Performance”, Routledge, London, 2008, 13 (3), pp. 307-319.
• RICŒUR, PAUL, La critica e la convinzione, trad. it. a cura di Daniella Iannotta, Jaca Book, Milano, 1997.
• RIZZERIO-DEVIS, LAURA, Dialectique et art dans la «République» e le «Sophiste» de Platon, in “Revue philosophique de Louvain”, Institut Supérieur de Philosophie de l’Université Catholique de Louvain, Louvain, 1999, 97 (2), pp. 231-252.
• RIZZOLATTI, GIACOMO, ET SINIGAGLIA, CORRADO, So quel che fai. Il cervello che agisce e i neuroni specchio, Raffaello Cortina, Milano, 2006.
• ROBIN, LEON, Storia del pensiero greco, Mondadori, Milano, 1970.
• ROBIN, LEON, Platone, Cisalpino, Bologna, 1996.
• RODRIGO, PIERRE, Platon e l’art austère de la distanciation, in Fattal, Michel (a cura di), La philosophie de Platon, L’Harmattan, Paris, 2001, 1, pp. 139-165.
• ROSEN, STANLEY, La querelle entre la philosophie et la poésie, in De Mattéi, Jean-François (a cura di), La naissance de la raison en Grèce: actes du congrès de Nice, mai 1987, Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, 1990, pp. 325-331.
• ROUSSEAU, JEAN-JACQUES, Emilio o dell’educazione, ed. int. a cura di Emma Nardi, La Nuova Italia, Firenze, 2002.
• SALOMON, NICOLETTA, La zattera di mimesis, I Greci, la creazione, l’arte, Marsilio, Venezia, 2001.
• SCARAMUZZO, GILBERTO, In-tendere. L’umana sophia di Luigi pirandello, Anicia, Roma, 2005.
• SCARAMUZZO, GILBERTO, Paideia Mimesis. Attualità e urgenza di una riflessione inattuale, Anicia, Roma, 2010.
• SCARAMUZZO, GILBERTO (a cura di), Mimopaideia. Buone pratiche per una Pedagogia dell’Espressione, Anicia. Roma, 2011.
• SLINGS, SIMON R. (a cura di), Platonis Rempublicam, in Scriptorum classicorum. Bibliotheca Oxoniensis, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2003.
• STEFANINI, LUIGI, Platone, Cedam, Padova, 1932-1935.
• STEFANINI, LUIGI, Imaginismo come problema filosofico, I, Cedam, Padova, 1936.
• STENZEL, JULIUS, Platone educatore, Laterza, Bari, 1966.
• TAYLOR, ALFRED EDWARD, Platone. L’uomo e l’opera, La Nuova Italia, Firenze, 1987.
• TEISSERENC, F, Mimèsis narrative et formation du caractère, in Dixsaut, M. (a cura di), Études sur la République de Platon, 1. De la Justice, Vrin, Paris, 2005, pp. 65-87.
• UNTERSTEINER, MARIO, Introduzione, in Platone, Repubblica Libro X, Luigi Loffedo, Napoli, 1966.
• VELOSO, CLAUDIO WILLIAM, Il problema dell’imitare in Aristotele, in “Quaderni urbinati di cultura classica”, 2000, N. S. 65, pp. 63-97.
• VERDENIUS, WILLEM JACOB, Mimesis: Plato's doctrine of artistic imitation and its meaning to us, Brill Archive, Leiden, 1972.
• VERNANT, JEAN-PIERRE, Nascita di immagini e altri scritti su religione, storia, ragione, trad. it. di Angela Montagna, Il Saggiatore, Milano, 1982.
• VERNANT, JEAN-PIERRE, Figure, idoli, maschere. Il racconto mitico da simbolo religioso a immagine artistica, trad. it. di Adriana Zangara, Il Saggiatore, Milano, 2001.
• WIEGMANN, HERMANN, Plato’s critique of the poets and the misunderstanding of his epistemological argumentation, in “Philosophy and rhetoric”, Penn State University Press, University Park, 1990, 23, pp. 109-124.
• WULF, CHRISTOPH, Mimesis, in Wulf, Christoph (a cura di), Le idee dell’antropologia, ed. it. a cura di Andrea Borsari, Bruno Mondadori, Milano, 2002, pp. 1039-1053.
• WULF, CHRISTOPH, Mímesis. L’arte e i suoi modelli, trad. it. a cura di Paolo Costa, Mimesis, Milano, 1995.
• WULF, CHRISTOPH (a cura di), Le idee dell’antropologia, ed. it. a cura di Andrea Borsari, Bruno Mondadori, Milano, 2002.
• YATES, VELVET, Madman, sophist, and imitator: Plato’s strategies for representing the poet, Thesis (Ph. D.), Princeton Uniersity, Princeton, 1998.
• ZELLER EDUARD, MONDOLFO RODOLFO, La filosofia dei Greci nel suo sviluppo storico, p. II, v. III, La Nuova Italia, Firenze, 1974.