Hellenistic Philosophy

The Hellenistic period was a time of great change in Alexander’s Empire. One of the changes taking place during the decades after Alexander’s death was the breakdown of the poleis, or Greek city-states. The erosion of the poleis left many people feeling alone and frightened. In their need, they turned to different emerging cultural movements, each of which attempted to provide the Greeks with what they had lost, a sense of community and a place where they “belonged.” Not least important of these emerging movements were the schools of philosophy that were founded and revived during the Hellenistic period.

The influence that philosophy had on the people of the Hellenistic period manifests itself in art. While some artwork produced during the Hellenistic period reflects the beliefs of the philosophical school of Epicurus, much of the artwork labeled “Hellenistic baroque” stands in contrast to a main belief of the Epicureans: the suppression of emotions. One piece of artwork that refutes Epicurus’ teachings on emotions is the Laocoon.

Epicurus’ teachings had a profound effect on the Hellenistic world. He was born in 341 BCE in Samos. At the age of 35, he settled in Athens and founded his Garden, which was a place where his followers could gather and be taught. The main tenets of Epicureanism are: 1) unattainable desires cause pain, so you should only desire what you can get, 2) the world is made up of atoms moving randomly in a void, 3) the gods should not be feared because they are uninterested and uninvolved in human affairs, and 4) death should not be feared. In order to live in accordance with these four main goals, Epicurus advocated withdrawing from society and living with other people who held similar beliefs.

Epicurus also taught about emotions. In his Principal Doctrines and The Vatican Sayings, Epicurus expounds on the need to eliminate emotions. Three emotions that Epicurus deals with specifically are anger, honor, and fear. “That which is blessed and immortal is not troubled itself, nor does it cause trouble to another. As a result, it is not affected by anger or favor, for these belong to weakness.”[i] Epicurus is saying that strength comes from the absence of anger and the absence of feelings of favor toward anyone. If you are angry with another person, it is because he has done something to hurt you, meaning he held some kind of advantage over you, be it physical strength or cunning. By showing hostility toward that person, you are admitting your inferiority. If you admire someone, you are again showing inferiority by acknowledging that another person is greater than you are in word or deed. Another weakness that Epicurus denounced was fear. “Any device whatever by which one frees himself from the fear of others is a natural good.”[ii] Fearing another person testifies to inferiority, and admitting inferiority is a sign of weakness.

So what is the importance of strength in Epicureanism? In Epigram I, Epicurus equates weakness with being troubled.[iii] Weakness leads to the desire for strength, but one must eliminate all desires, with the exception of those desires that are easily attainable or very basic, such as food and shelter. In another epigram, Epicurus states: “The just man is least disturbed; the unjust man is filled with the greatest turmoil.”[iv] For nearly everyone, being the strongest person, whether physically or intellectually, is impossible. Inability to become superior causes pain, leads to turmoil, and prevents a person from living justly. To avoid this scenario, one must avoid being weak. This means that the emotions of anger, honor, and fear, among others, must be eliminated in order to live a pleasurable, just, calm life.

The elimination of emotions was a major part of Epicurus’ teachings. This tenet stands in stark contrast to an artistic movement of the Hellenistic Period. The baroque movement, while it had been present in the artwork of previous centuries, became prevalent in the period from 225 – 150 BCE.[v] Baroque art displays “a theatrical manner of representation which emphasizes emotional intensity…”[vi] There were many methods available to artists to help them create the baroque affect. Restless surfaces, agonized facial expressions, and deep carvings to create extreme contrasts are three of the ways that Pollitt mentions.[vii] One piece of artwork that exemplifies this baroque style and stands in sharp contrast to Epicurus’ teachings on emotions is the sculpture Laocoon.

The Laocoon group was sculpted around 50 BCE.[viii] The sculpture displays Laocoon, a priest in Troy, and his two sons being attacked by two large serpents, which had been sent by the gods to prevent Laocoon from warning the Trojans about the danger of the Trojan Horse.[ix] The sculpture is a marvelous example of the techniques, mentioned by Pollitt, that artists used to create the baroque affect. Laocoon cocks his head to the side as he looks skyward. His brow is furrowed, his mouth slightly open, and his beard and curly hair untamed. His facial expression conveys despair, pain, and wonderment at why he was the target of such a brutal attack. The head of his younger son is tilted backward, and he is obviously in pain as one of the serpents bites his torso. Meanwhile, the older son is looking on. One of the serpents is wound around his arm, but he is concentrating on removing the coil of the other serpent from his leg. The older son is looking at his father and brother. His expression can best be described as “horrified,” yet through his eyes we see pity and the faint hope that if he could just unwrap the coils, he could escape.

The bodies of the men also convey their suffering. The muscles in Laocoon’s legs and arms are taut, and the veins in his extremities are bulging to the surface. Laocoon’s left hand grasps at the head of a serpent as it bites him, and the knuckles of his hand show the tightness of his grip. As he is being bitten, the muscles in Laocoon’s torso contract and show the outline of his ribs. The intricate details of the sculpture extend all the way down to the feet. The toes on Laocoon’s right foot curl up in pain, and the right foot of his younger son presses in pain against his left foot. The Laocoon group, through the facial expressions and intricacy in the bodily details, displays fear, pain, and a sense of disbelief as Laocoon looks skyward and, by the look on his face, asks “Why me?”

The sculptor of the Laocoon group has rejected many of the teachings of Epicurus. In one of his epigrams, Epicurus states: “Continuous bodily suffering does not last long. Intense pain is very brief, and even pain that barely outweighs physical pleasure does not last many days.”[x] The faces of these men seem to denounce this claim. Laocoon and his sons are suffering, but this suffering is not the pain that goes as quickly as it comes. The serpents have intertwined themselves among the arms and legs of the three men, something that could not have been done quickly. The serpents are biting Laocoon and his younger son on their torsos, a tender spot. Besides the physical pain, there is the mental pain of seeing your father, sons, or brother being slowly poisoned. The sculpture can be viewed as a critique of Epicurus’ view toward pain. While it was easy for Epicurus to sit in his Garden and teach that pain is nothing compared to pleasure, the actual moments of pain do not go by quickly. Thought processes do not normally lead you to say that your pain may be bad now, but that will just make the pleasure more pleasurable when it comes. If we believe Epicurus, there is no afterlife and no god to reward your good deeds, so when does the pleasure come after you have been smothered, bitten, and poisoned by god-sent serpents?

Laocoon refutes Epicurus’ claims about pain in another way. While the epigram states that “Intense pain is very brief,” Laocoon and his sons will forever be represented in their most painful moment of life, at the threshold of their deaths. The decision by the artist to sculpt the scene could be viewed as a conscious effort to portray the fact that pain lasts a long time, sometimes forever, and that Epicurus’ teaching that pain is brief is a false teaching. The viewers of the Laocoon will see pain and suffering whenever they view the statue, be it for hours, days, or years. The pain of Laocoon and his sons is not brief. If we look at the sculpture today, we still see the pain in Laocoon’s face and the fear of his eldest son, the same pain and fear that were present in these faces more than 2000 years ago when the sculpture was created.

The sculpture also challenges another aspect of Epicurean philosophy that deals with emotions: fear of the gods. Epicurus tells us that we should not fear the gods because the gods are not concerned in human affairs and any kind of fear makes a person weak. Yet the story of the Laocoon is in direct opposition to these views. The gods send the serpents to kill Laocoon because they are against Troy and want to see it destroyed, something Laocoon was attempting to prevent. The gods do not have the laissez-faire attitude that Epicurus claims. Not only are they interested in human affairs, but they must follow these matters with some regularity if they believe that the Trojans have done something worthy of punishment. Also, the gods acted upon their opinions by meting out a horrible, very painful punishment to the wrongdoers. The fear and anguish of Laocoon and his sons makes the viewer reconsider the idea that the gods are not to be feared. After all, look what happened to those who did not show fear.

Laocoon is a good example of Baroque art, but it becomes fascinating to analyze the artwork in contrast to Epicurus and his philosophical school. Epicurus advocated the suppression of emotions because emotions create weakness, which leads to unjust living. For Epicurus, pain should be looked at in a larger picture: it won’t last forever and it will make you appreciate pleasure more when the pleasure comes. Also, fear is a weakness, especially fear of the gods because the gods don’t care about humans. Yet, in the Laocoon, we see the pain of the three men and we know the reason for that pain, ignoring the gods. Laocoon indicates that pain can last a long time, even forever, and that fear of the gods is necessary in order to stay alive. We see that much of Hellenistic baroque artwork displays the same disdain for Epicurus’ idea of suppression of emotions. Laocoon is an excellent example of this rejection of Epicurean principles.

[i] Epicurus, Principal Doctrines, I.

[ii] Epicurus, Principal Doctrines, VI.

[iii] See footnote 1.

[iv] Epicurus, Principal Doctrines, XVII.

[v] Pollitt, page 111.

[vi] Pollitt, page 111.

[vii] Pollitt, page 111.

[viii] Valentin Müller, cited by Bieber, page 20.

[ix] Pollitt, page 121.

[x] Epicurus, Principal Doctrines, IV.

Bibliography

Bieber, Margarete. Laocoon: The Influence of the Group Since its Rediscovery. New York:

Columbia University Press, 1942.

Epicurus. Letters, Principle Doctrines, and Vatican Sayings. Translated by Russel M.

Greer. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1985.

Pollitt, J.J. Art in the Hellenistic Age. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1986.