Kitap 3
10.1
Then again, whenever he talked with artists who followed their art as a business, he was as useful to them as to others.Thus, on entering the house of Parrhasius the painter one day, he asked in the course of a conversation with him: Is painting a representation of things seen, Parrhasius? Anyhow, you painters with your colours represent and reproduce figures high and low, in light and in shadow, hard and soft, rough and smooth, young and old.True.
10.2
And further, when you copy types of beauty, it is so difficult to find a perfect model that you combine the most beautiful details of several, and thus contrive to make the whole figure look beautiful.
10.3
Yes, we do!Well now, do you also reproduce the character of the soul, the character that is in the highest degree captivating, delightful, friendly, fascinating, lovable? Or is it impossible to imitate that?Oh no, Socrates; for how could one imitate that which has neither shape nor colour nor any of the qualities you mentioned just now, and is not even visible?
10.4
Do human beings commonly express the feelings of sympathy and aversion by their looks?I think so.Then cannot thus much be imitated in the eyes?Undoubtedly.Do you think that the joys and sorrows of their friends produce the same expression on men’s faces, whether they really care or not?Oh no, of course not: they look radiant at their joys, downcast at their sorrows.Then is it possible to represent these looks too?Undoubtedly.
10.5
Moreover, nobility and dignity, self-abasement and servility, prudence and understanding, insolence and vulgarity, are reflected in the face and in the attitudes of the body whether still or in motion.True.Then these, too, can be imitated, can they not?Undoubtedly.Now which do you think the more pleasing sight, one whose features and bearing reflect a beautiful and good and lovable character, or one who is the embodiment of what is ugly and depraved and hateful?No doubt there is a great difference, Socrates.
