Plato\'s Censorship Although Book III in Plato\'s

Plato's Censorship

Although Book III in Plato's The Republic is titled 'The Arts in Education', it has come to be known as the author's censorship treatise. In order to provide an 'ideal' education for the state's guardians, or rulers, and to ensure social and moral welfare of the citizens, Plato argues that art and literature should be censored. By controlling the creative output of artists, poets, and writer; and by amending or deleting their previous work, the state would ensure that, "some tales are to be told, and others are not to be told to our disciples from their youth upward, if we mean them to honor the gods and their parents, and to value friendship with one another" (p66). While agreeing with Plato's commitment to improving education, and with his belief in upholding social and moral values, this paper disagrees with the control and censorship of art, literature, or any other freedom of expression that exists within a liberal and democratic state.

The majority of individuals within any society tend to agree upon the vices and behaviors that are considered to be immoral and unacceptable, and the structures of legislation and social guidelines tend to deal with those that are not tolerated. However, within any group or community, there exists an enormous range and variety of personal and cultural values and morals which, in a democratic state, should not be under the control or censorship of a ruling minority. Just as the artist or poet should possess the freedom to express their ideas, so each individual should remain at liberty to read whatever literature, or appreciate whichever work of art, they wish to. To oppress this freedom is the foundation of dictatorship and fascism, and even Plato, after asking that "the same control to be extended to other artists... And is he who cannot conform to this rule of ours to be prevented from practicing his art in our State, lest the taste of our citizens be corrupted by him?"(70), expresses signs of being unsure as to the correctness of his proposal by adding, "But shall we be right in getting rid of them?" (68)

Aside from the constitutional objections and opposition to any attempt by the state to 'permit' or 'prohibit' the literature that people may read, there is also the fundamental problem of; who is to act as the judge and jury on the definition of acceptable and unacceptable content? Presumably, as in Plato's theory, it would be those who rule; the guardians, and "persons of worth" (70). The dangers that this poses to liberty and individual rights include the obvious temptation of the government, or decision makers, to impose their set of morals and values upon the population through the choice of permitted and banned art and literature. In addition, this presents the rulers with a golden opportunity to create a censorship strategy that, rather than maintaining the existing values and morals, would have the ability to influence and manipulate individual and social opinion. Considering that the artists and writers whose work questions and challenges the existing political and social structure would be the first ones to become banned, the way would be left open for those in power to increasingly erode the rights and freedoms of the ruled, without opposition. Examples such as Hitler's Germany, or the George Orwell book 1984, paint a frightening picture of the likely outcome if such censorship was introduced.

Contrary to Plato's theory; education and knowledge should be available to everyone within society, and should not become the exclusive property of the ruling elite. It is important that everyone has the opportunity, if they so wish, to read the Greek Mythology that Plato desired to suppress, and any other literature that teaches of human history, culture, and progress. Only by possessing extensive, uncensored access to such literature are individuals able to gain sufficient knowledge and awareness to understand and question the world around them, and their place within it. That, however, is the primary reason for Plato, and countless politicians and leaders since, arguing for control and censorship of literature and art. Unlike many modern day rulers, Plato does not disguise his intention and proclaims that, "if anyone at all is to have the privilege of lying, the rulers of the State should be the persons; and they, in their dealings either with enemies or with their own citizens, may be allowed to lie for the public good" (70). Only by reading the works of those who encourage the reader to question and critically analyze the social and political issues that affect their lives, are individuals able to identify and challenge those lies that are being told 'in their own interests'.