Writings
Any building, formation of human design, undergoes some level of erosion. Exposure to the elements, time itself, the chemical half-life of the materials used in its construction are all physical objects of our recognized reality. With this notion of all things changing, Plato would not recognize any of our modern structures as real. They are temporary; built up, destroyed, and added to. The Parthenon, one of the world’s classical structures is one such building that has undergone change, erosion, destruction by the surrounding society’s conflictions. Its ruins remain but even in its stagment state it changes for it changes in the context and relation to society encompassing it. Like Alice’s experience in Through the Looking Glass standing still everything keeps changing around her, and it is not something to be controlled.
Plato’s thought that the ‘things’ that are the most real are those that do not change. The eternal, unchanging the one can depend upon because it will always be. We can try to keep certain thing from changing or challenge ourselves to resting it to its original. Renovation, restoration of our ancient antiquities has become a fade. We restore them so that we may be tourist with our photograph of us with ‘Uncle Bob’ standing next to a column; the attempt to claim a connection of us and the classical, glorified, culture. By doing so the Parthenon becomes overly a symbol, the actual importance of the building is lost as is the history of its original function to the general public. It would be degraded down to one image, no a real object of substance. If the ‘Allegory of the Cave’ were to be used we have gone from seeing it as it moves around the fire to a shadow cast on the wall (Leebaw).
It is rather depressing, to me, that an object would be demoted, or rather we have no longer are able to see it. Its design, use of spatial harmony is lost to the viewer. But it also says a lot of our society today. It placed on Plato’s diagram, the Divided Line, are only experience the Parthenon through our physical senses. Few will know some facts on the temple from guild books and history but those are up dated, history (it does not change, cannot change what was) is discovered and rewritten-varying in its accuracy. Knowledge of the Parthenon might never be achieved, yet we accumulated facts.
There are a several tidbits of information that we do have. The reasoning behind its dimensions is for one. The Greek ration of perfection and harmony (5:8) demonstrates the usage of the golden section. The lack of straight line is another. There can be the odd individual that will claim that its lines have become curved, warped, with time and ground settling under the materials used to construct it. But this is cast aside before uttered in that it is built with marble, which is not a porous stone (why it is used for countertops) and durable.
The optical illusion achieved by Iktinos and Kallikrates is still something to marvel at. The knowledge used in the adaptation to the viewer’s eye demonstrated understanding of perception of architectural design of their day. On the Trifector of Forms it can be applied to the category. First it can be taken in as a piece of art (which Plato places in the lowest of his Divided Line hierarchy). The perfection in design mirrors a reflection of a past structure- as seen today. Photography, pictures all achieving to be a symbol of something greater. Picture/photography, an image of a physical object, a representation of the historical urban context. There is the Parthenon itself and all that it embodies. Then there is the ‘Form’ of the Parthenon; the simplest essence of what it is. A structure of perfection, a temple of Athena, that too can be placed lower not yet the bare form. The Parthenon is a temple to replace an older destroyed by the Persian invasion. As an object that is subjected to change can it have an unchangeable Form? Replacement, variance in function (used also as a treasury and converted into a Christian church later), constantly fluctuating slipping further from Plato’s concept of the real (Wikipedia, Parthenon). The usage of the Parthenon as a religious building is an interesting note. The connection with the divine ties it to other worldliness. The Higher Forms, Plato kept the concepts of Beauty, Truth, and Good as too pure, in a kind of Platonic heaven that is outside of the world. A temple, a building to dedicated to the worship of a god (Athena, later Christian trinity). Yet connecting to an optical illusion is a tie corrupting the purity that defines these Higher Forms.
Addressing the optical illusion created by the use of curvature, the Parthenon would be self placed as an aspect of imagination. Though the building appears, to the human eye, to be completely linear in construction when in actuality there is not a single straight line in the classical edifies. Curvature in the Parthenon is use so in the perception of the view the building seems not to say in the middle (which with the extent of it physical length would occur). This is used also in the placement of the Parthenon’s columns, increasing weight barring capacity and appearance of straight vertical line. These alterations can be placed with at of Michelangelo’s David. A formable statue of the human form was carved with the foreknowledge that the viewers’ perspective will from ‘worm’s eye view’ (differential term of viewer’s eyelevel in relation to the object in view e.i. bird’s eye, eyelevel). If one is the see/observe the statue at eyelevel the disproportion of human anatomy (7 ½ heads) can be clearly seen. But from the viewer’s angle it has the illusion of human perfection in statue representation. A similar line of thought is in the architectural planning for the Parthenon. The usage of curved line tricks the eye. It has taken a false appearance. This aspect maintains its placement on Plato’s diagram of Moral/Reality is the lower forms with images and it is a false presentation for our physical senses, keeping it still within the Lower Forms.
The use of the golden section, the philosophy of spatial perfection, places it in that pedestal perfection. The presence of curved line, distortion of physical constructive line, moves it off. Simplicity in design is not present in the constructive plan. As an art object, verse an architectural building, distortions throw off the harmony and rhythm “depend on simplicity” (Plato, 72). The complexity of the optical illusion effectually creates the illusion of linearity. The appearance of simplicity adds to the sum if false imagery that is the Parthenon. Illusion, images spiral slide further into the darkest shadows of the Cave.
If the Parthenon is put in the placement of a shadow within Plato’s ‘Allegory of the Cave’ it can be placed in a critique of the society that manufactured it. As a public place of worship, ‘house’ of Athena. As an illusion of the wall, it only appears as a shadow because of the fire standing behind it. What is the fire; a social lie that limits the perception of reality, cultural traditions that keep the general public from stepping out of bounds that projects the image of the Parthenon? The comparison can go on further and further; abstracting a building into concepts of morality within a society.
Plato’s analysis of reality and morality breaks objects and/or concepts can be broken down in image/illusion of something, the actual thing and the Form of it. Even broken down into a basic ‘form’ that can be fractured as well. Plato uses this method to uncover/discover the pure essence of Form-Good, Truth, and Beauty.
Bibliography
Beard, Mary. Parthenon. Harvard University Press: New York, 2003
Leebaw ,Browyn. In the Pursuit of Knowledge and Ideas: Allegory of the Cave. Lecture given University of California: Riverside, February 7, 2006
Melchert, Norman. The Great Conversation, Fifth Ed. Oxford University Press Inc: New York, 2007
Plato. The Republic. Dover Publications, Inc: New York, 2000
Wilkin, David. Art Past, Art Present. Sixth Edition. Prentice Hall, 2008
Wikipedia. Parthenon. Wikipedia: Free Encyclopedia. Online, June 25, 2008
Wikipedia. Plato. Wikipedia: Free Encyclopedia. Online, June 25, 2008