Cynthia Martinez

Professor Pugh

English 372

9 December 2013

Poetry and Its Power to Change Societal Thought

Throughout time literary thinkers have been interested in critiquing and analyzing the

function of poetry. When looking back at the critiques literary thinkers have made over time on

the topic of poetry, it is obvious that many thinkers have been interested in the power of poetry

as well as its relationship to society. As time has progressed poetry’s function and abilities have

differed in the eyes of critical thinkers; however, many share the idea that poetry has the ability

to change and manipulate the thoughts of people within society. Three literary theorists that

illustrate this similarity of thought are Plato, Percy Shelley, and W.E.B. DuBois. Even though

these three thinkers lived within different time periods the critiques and thoughts they shared

with the public share a similar concern for the real power poetry can have on society. While

Plato, Shelley, and DuBois do not find poetry’s ultimate power and function to be the same, they

all make arguments that support the idea that poetry has the power to change thoughts and

opinions within a society.

One of the earliest thinkers to discuss the topic of poetry as well as its effects on society

is Plato. He discusses his ideas within his famous text, Republic, through the character of

Socrates. In this text Plato explains why he finds poetry to be potentially dangerous for society.

His main argument to support his view on the dangers of poetry, heavily coincide with his

thoughts on the mimetic function of art. For Plato, objects within the material world lead away

from truth because they are mere copies of “timeless universals, called Forms or Ideas” (41).

Martinez 2

Therefore, since “all art – including poetry- is a mimesis of nature, a copy of objects in the

physical world,” Plato believes that art leads away from truth instead of toward it because it is

simply a copy of a copy (41). Plato explains this point within Republic, when Socrates argues

that audiences of poetry do not get the “ideal” form of an object because the written word: “gives

a distorted image of nature…just as a painter might produce a portrait which completely fails to

capture the likeness of the original” (46). This argument presented by Socrates, shows that Plato

finds poetry to be a poor mimesis, or imitation, of nature, which leads him to fear the possible

effects it could have on audiences.

Plato’s fear of poetic power in a republic is what causes him to also present the argument

that poetic works should be monitored within society. He presents this argument within Republic

when Socrates explains how members of the republic are easily swayed by poetic works and why

this has negative connotations. To make this point, Socrates begins by stating that: “a young

person can’t tell when something is allegorical and when it isn’t and any idea admitted by a

person of that age tends to become almost ineradicable and permanent” (47). He later goes on

saying, “[this] is why a very great deal of importance should be placed upon ensuring that the

first stories they hear are best adapted for their moral improvement” (47). This argument

presented within in the text by Socrates, shows that Plato believes the mimetic quality of poetry

can be harmful because it has the power to lead its audiences down a negative path. For Plato

mimesis leads away from truth and since people within society are unaware that they are being

influenced by poetry they are susceptible to being led away from the “ideal” as well as change

their character for the worse. This power that poetry has to impact the republic in such a negative

way is frightening to Plato. Therefore, explaining why his text makes such a strong case for the

Martinez 3

monitor of poetry within the republic in order to insure a good morality for its members. This

helps to also explain why Plato is an advocate for philosophy rather than poetry within his

Republic. Since Plato’s main fear is that poetry will lead audiences away from the “ideal,” he

argues for the discipline of philosophy to have more of an importance in society, due to its ability

to make people think critically rather than being easily manipulated by something like a poem.

Unlike Shelley and DuBois, Plato seems to be more fearful of the negative effects poetic

power can have in society. In order to understand why Plato is more fearful than the other two

thinkers, it is necessary to understand the time period he was writing in. Plato created the

dialogue Republic, which discusses his views on poetic function in society, in 375 B.C.E. This

time period was a lot different than the time period both Shelley and DuBois wrote their works

in. During Plato’s time period (ca. 427- ca. 347 B.C.E) an oral culture was present rather than the

written culture that we now know today. Instead of preserving information through books or

other written forms like today’s written culture, the oral culture Plato lived in preserved and

passed down information simply by word of mouth and performance. This is better explained in

Eric Havelock’s Preface to Plato, where he illustrates in great detail the oral culture that was

present during Plato’s life in order to help modern readers understand why Plato is so fearful of

poetry within his Republic. An example of this is when Havelock explains that during Plato’s

era, “the only possible verbal technology available to guarantee the preservation and fixity of

transmission was that of the rhythmic word organized cunningly in verbal and metrical patterns”

(42). He goes on explaining why Plato is fearful of the effects poetry can have within an oral

culture, that’s only technology to preserve and transmit information is through poetized

statements. Havelock makes this point when he states that in the Platonic era, “any poetized

Martinez 4

statement must be designed and recited in such a way as to make it a kind of drama within the

soul both of the recited and hence also the audience. This kind of drama, this way of reliving

experience in memory instead of analyzing and understanding it, is for [Plato] the enemy” (45).

This statement illustrates how an oral culture thrived through performance and was harmful to

Plato due to this innate quality. Havelock’s explanation here helps to show why Plato makes the

argument that poetry is harmful to the morality of society within his Republic. By making poetry

dramatic when performed, listeners were easily swept in by it without really understanding or

having a second thought on what the poem was really saying. Even if a poem was giving false

depictions of certain actions or events, listeners during the platonic era would have been unable

to recognize it. This is why Plato is more fearful of poetic function within society than later

thinkers, like Shelley or DuBois, who created their arguments in regards to written culture rather

than in response to the oral culture present in the platonic era.

Percy Shelley, in contrast to Plato, presents a lighter argument about the positive affects

the power and function of poetry can have within society. Shelley presents this argument within

his treatise, “Defence of Poetry”, written in the early nineteenth century. From the title of

Shelley’s treatise, it is apparent immediately that he means to present the case for why he is an

advocate for poetry within society. Shelley begins presenting this case to readers by first

explaining his views on poetry’s function. Early in the treatise, Shelley makes a the claim that

poetry: “awaken and enlarges the mind itself by rendering it the receptacle of a thousand

unapprehended combinations of thought,” allowing it to “lift the veil from the hidden beauty of

the world” (596). While Plato would argue that Shelley’s statement here helps support why

poetry is dangerous for society, Shelley goes on to use this statement to show how poetry is

Martinez 5

beneficial to society as a whole. He starts to show this by describing how poetry’s ability to “lift

the veil” affects readers in a positive way. A prime of example of this is when he states: “Poetry

enlarges the circumference of the imagination by replenishing it with thoughts of ever new

delight, which have the power of attracting and assimilation to their own nature all other

thoughts, and which form new intervals and interstices whose void for ever craves fresh food”

(596). Rather than believing that poetry can turn people down the wrong path, Shelley’s

statement here shows that he believes that poetry only has the ability to affect readers in positive

ways. This affect is in fact so positive to Shelley that later in his treatise he makes the argument

if poetry were never created other disciplines would have never came about. Towards the end of

“A Defence of Poetry,” Shelley makes this most significant argument about poetry’s true power

when he explains that: “the human mind could never, except by the intervention of these

excitements [poetry], have been awakened to the invention of the grosser sciences and that

application of analytical reasoning to the aberrations of society…” (608). Here Shelley is making

one of his strongest claims within the treatise. Instead of simply praising poetry, Shelley is

arguing strongly for why poetry should be seen as the superior discipline within society. In the

eyes of Shelley, societies need poetry in order to create new thoughts and expand into other areas

of knowledge.

Unlike Plato who values the discipline of philosophy, Shelley’s “Defence of Poetry”

makes it apparent that he believes poetry is superior to all disciplines, including philosophy. The

views of Shelley and Plato are opposing mainly due to the ultimate affect they feel poetry has on

societal thoughts. In Plato’s Republic, it is apparent that his fear of poetry stems from the idea

that poetry can harm society due to its mimetic function that leads away from truth. Shelley on

Martinez 6

the other hand, makes it obvious that he feels that poetry is necessary in society due to its ability

to widen the imagination. He even closes his treatise by making the argument that, “Poets are the

unacknowledged legislators of the World” (613). This statement shows that he truly believes that

poetic power is beneficial to changing societal thoughts in a positive way. While there are

obvious differences between Plato and Shelley’s thoughts on poetry’s main function, there seem

to also be similar ideas within their respective texts on the power of poetic works. Both Shelley

and Plato put a lot of emphasis on the power poetry has to change the thoughts within society.

Even though they come to different conclusions on whether the overall effect of poetry’s power

is good of bad, Plato feels it can harm people since it presents copies rather than “ideals” and

Shelley believes it benefits people due to its ability to open the minds of readers, they agree that

poetry is not just created to be mere words on a paper or in a performance. They instead agree

that poetry has the ability to influence everyone that encounters it, showing that Plato and

Shelley are in agreement that poetry is in fact powerful.

Another literary critic that discusses the similar topics as Shelley and Plato is twentieth

century African American activist W.E.B. DuBois. Similar to the other two thinkers, DuBois

agrees that poetry has the ability to influence its audiences and potentially change the way they

think and act in society. In one of his most famous addresses, “Criteria of Negro Art,” DuBois

presents his views on the function of art, including poetry, as well as his thoughts on what its

ultimate effect on society are. Unlike Shelley or Plato who were writing in order to promote one

discipline over another, DuBois presents his views in order to persuade African Americans to

take part in the creation of art. While DuBois’ speech has a different agenda than Plato and

Shelley, he shares some similar ideas to both predecessors on the topic of poetic function and

power. Similar to Shelley and Plato, DuBois believes that all art, including poetry, has the power

Martinez 7

to influence societal thoughts. This is why in his speech he tells audiences that “all Art is

propaganda” (875). While DuBois does not focus on solely poetry in his address, the statement

he gives regarding “art as propaganda” shows that he, like Shelley and Plato, believes that art,

including poetry, is powerful enough to bring about societal change.

Due to the time period DuBois was living in, the 20th century, he makes an argument for

the power and function of poetry in order to help African Americans during a time they were

discriminated against. Since DuBois believes that art has the ability to change opinions within

society, he argues for black artists to step forward and participate in creating art. He makes this

point within his address when he states: “it is the bounden duty of black America to begin this

great work of the creation of beauty, of the preservation of Beauty, of the realization of

beauty…” (875). DuBois further makes his point when he later makes the claim that artists are

capable of, “one true method of gaining sympathy and human interest” through the goodness of

their works (875). This is why DuBois feels it is so necessary for black America to participate in

the art community because he believes it is the only way they can gain “sympathy and human

interest” for their race. This also explains why he also tells his audience that, “until the art of the

black folk compels recognition they with not be rated as human” (876). By saying that blacks

will “not be rated as human” until their art is recognized, DuBois is making a strong claim for

the recognition of artistic power and function within society. Due to this major claim, DuBois is

able to make his support his main argument that all art including poetry, is capable of changing

the negative perception whites have of black Americans. This is why DuBois’ “Criteria of Negro

Art” urges black Americans to take part in creating art because only when black America defines

what is beautiful through art will they be considered “human” within white society.

Martinez 8

When looking at DuBois’ overall argument presented within his “Criteria of Negro Art,”

it seems that he considered the thoughts and ideas both Plato and Shelley present within their

own treatises. Like Plato, DuBois also believes that art, including poetry, has the ability to

influence societal thought, explaining why he has the particular agenda to persuade black

America to participate in the creation of art. However, rather than being fearful of the affects art

can have on society like Plato, DuBois is more optimistic of the affects art can have on changing

societal thoughts in a positive way. This major difference between Plato and DuBois can be

attributed to the different time period they presented their arguments in. As stated early, Plato

wrote his Republic, during a time when an oral tradition was the dominant form of

communicating thoughts within society. This helps to explain why Plato is more fearful of

poetry’s power than someone like DuBois who wrote his “Criteria of Negro Art” in the early 20th

century. While DuBois is more optimistic than Plato, it is apparent that his optimism stems from

the thoughts he has on art’s overall function and power. Unlike Plato, who believes poetry is a

poor representation of material objects and events, DuBois believes that art has the ability to

change societal opinion in a positive way. This is why DuBois urges so strongly for the

participation of African Americans in the artistic world. This participation to DuBois is the only

way black America can the perception of the dominant white culture for the better.

While Plato and DuBois have some similarities in their arguments about arts function in

society, Shelley and DuBois seem to share more of the same opinion on the overall function of

art and poetry. Of the all three literary critics that discuss their thoughts and opinions on society,

Shelly and DuBois are the most similar. While it is obvious that DuBois has a different agenda

for asserting power in art than Shelley, Shelley brings up similar points to DuBois that he would

find no problem with. In “A Defence of Poetry,” there is a particular moment where Shelley

Martinez 9

parallels DuBois idea of art and the perception of society. The moment Shelley does this is

illustrated when he states: “Poetry ever communicates all the pleasure which men are capable of

receiving; it is ever still the light of life; the source of whatever of beautiful, or generous, or true

can have place in an evil time” (601). Here Shelley is making a similar point that DuBois makes

in his “Criteria of Negro Art,” being that poetry, or art for DuBois, has the ability to change the

views people have on particular things. DuBois would praise Shelley for the quotation above,

particular because of the last thought in the sentence, which asserts that art can determine what is

true and beautiful in an “evil time.” This similarity of ideas shows the Shelley and DuBois both

agree that art, specifically poetry for Shelley, has the ability to widen the thoughts and opinions

members of society have on particular subjects. While they agree on the basic idea of the

function of art and poetry it is important to note that they come to different conclusions at the

end of their texts. While Shelley believes that poetry widens people’s imaginations, ultimately

causing members of society to expand their knowledge on other subjects, DuBois believes that

art defines what is beautiful causing it to have the ability to tell society what they should find

beautiful and “human” within the world.

When looking at the different arguments Plato, Shelley, and DuBois present in their

respective texts it is apparent that they share a similar idea on the function and power poetry and

art can have on society. While they all agree that art, especially poetry, has the power and ability

to influence societal thought. Of the three thinkers, it is obvious that Shelley and DuBois present

similar arguments when compared to the earlier thoughts of Plato. This difference is mainly due

to the different cultures that were present during the time of the thinkers’ lives. Shelley and

DuBois are writing their works a century apart from each other, which helps to explain why their

arguments are more similar to one another. However, even though Shelley and DuBois seem to

Martinez 10

be more in agreement with one another they both still bring up similar thoughts and ideas to

those of Plato. This similarity among all three thinkers has to deal with the amount of power they

all attribute to poetry.

While Plato, Percy Shelley, and W.E.B. Dubois come to different conclusions on the

overall affect poetry’s power has on society, they all give an immense amount of importance to

poetic function and its ability to change thoughts and opinions within society. This agreement

between the three thinkers helps to illustrate how literary critics over time have shared similar

ideas on the status of literary works, like poetry, but ultimately come to different conclusions in

the end. This sharing of ideas and forming of different conclusions shows how literary thinkers

overtime begin to form new thoughts and ideas based on the time period they come from as well

as the agenda they set forth for their literary critiques. Plato, Shelley, and DuBois are a perfect

example of this because they show firsthand how a similar idea that poetry is powerful, can end

up moving in three completely different directions in order to support a specific agenda: for Plato

he directs his argument to promote philosophy over poetry, for Shelly he uses his argument to

show why poetry is superior to all other disciplines, and for DuBois he uses the argument of the

power of poetry in order to influence blacks to take part in defining the beautiful. All of these

agendas are different yet they all share the main idea that poetic power can change society. This

illustrates how literary critics over time change and manipulate similar arguments in order to best

meet the agendas they set for themselves and influence the society’s they are a part of.

Martinez 11

Works Cited

DuBois, W.E.B. "Criteria of Negro Art." The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. 2nd ed.

New York W.W. Norton, 2010. 870-77. Print.

Havelock, Eric Alfred. "Poetry as Preserved Communication." Preface to Plato. Cambridge:

Belknap, 1963. 36-49. Print.

Plato. " From Republic." The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. 2nd ed. New York:

Norton, 2010. 45-77. Print.

Shelley, Percy. "A Defence of Poetry." The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism. 2nd ed.

New York: W.W. Norton, 2010. 595-613. Print.