Imitation and LiteratureImitation is a fundamental concept in the creation and study of literature. The fundamental assumptions embedded in imitation create a distinct and divisive method of perception. Imitation requires a fundamental belief in separation: appearance separated from reality, form separated from content. Literary works possess a dual existence, where the surface becomes extremely useful in its ability to reveal the substance contained within it. Since the truth remains hidden, it can only be discerned or discovered through imitation. Thus imitation exists as an intermediary in a variety of artistic representations, each of which aspires to an accurate representation of the meaning, perhaps even of the fundamental truths of human existence. For Plato, however, art imitates a world already very far from authentic reality, the Truth, an intrinsically defective copy of an already imperfect world. Art as imitation is irrelevant to what is real. Many critics since Plato have attempted to re-establish the essential value of art by redefining or renegotiating the boundaries between imitation and authentic reality, between the text itself and the meaning. From ancient to more modern critics, art is defined, denigrated or redeemed by its ability to imitate. Aristotle values ​​imitation as a natural process of humanity. Tragedy is simply a manifestation of the human desire to imitate. He states that every man “learns his lesson through imitation, and we observe that all men find pleasure in imitations” (44). Unlike Plato's world of forms, knowledge of truth and goodness are rooted in the observable universe for Aristotle. Because imitation strives to create precise and particular images of the real world, it is a source of potential discovery and pleasure. Neoclassical criticism accepts Aristotle's statements about the nature of art and reality as given. Art has value precisely because it is imitative. As Sir Philip Sydney states, “Poetry is an art of imitation…with this object, to teach and delight” (137). Imitation not only entertains, but acquires a moral/ethical purpose: to teach virtue. Artists must, in addition to possessing great creative abilities, also have the moral responsibility to give shape to their imitations. Samuel Johnson appears to revisit Plato's attack on art by admitting that accurate imitation of morally questionable subjects is not only unacceptable, but potentially harmful to those who encounter it. To accommodate a strong moral sense, Johnson describes imitation as a process of interpretation. "The task of a poet... is to examine not the individual, but the species.