This book attempts to bridge the gulf that still exists between 'literary' and 'philosophical' interpreters of Plato by looking at his use of characterization. Characterization is intrinsic to dramatic form and a concern with human character in an ethical sense pervades the dialogues on the discursive level. Form and content are further reciprocally related through Plato's discursive preoccupation with literary characterization. Two opening chapters examine the methodological issues involved in reading Plato 'as drama' and a set of questions surrounding Greek (...) 'character' words, including ancient Greek views about the influence of dramatic character on an audience. The figure of Sokrates qua Platonic 'hero' also receives preliminary discussion. The remaining chapters offer close readings of select dialogues, chosen to show the wide range of ways in which Plato uses his characters, with special emphasis on the kaleidoscopic figure of Sokrates and on Plato's own relationship to his 'dramatic' hero. (shrink)

In this international and interdisciplinary collection of critical essays, distinguished contributors examine a crucial premise of traditional readings of Plato's dialogues: that Plato's own doctrines and arguments can be read off the statements made in the dialogues by Socrates and other leading characters. The authors argue in general and with reference to specific dialogues, that no character should be taken to be Plato's mouthpiece. This is essential reading for students and scholars of Plato.

Christopher Rowe's new book is an ambitious attempt to walk the tightrope between, on the one hand, bone-headed neglect of Plato's use of dramatic form, and, on the other, obtuse blindness to the presence of a serious philosophical agenda. This locates Rowe on the cutting edge of current methodological controversies, but his book also has deep roots in the past. He harks back to the oft-maligned Paul Shorey to offer an updated, newly sophisticated "unitarian" reading of the dialogues, one that (...) depends heavily on equating Plato's own voice with that of his Socrates, who serves as "[Plato's] alter ego, his persona, his mask". This Socrates is not merely a mouthpiece for a developing Plato's changing views, but a coherent character who represents a consistent Platonic voice throughout the works in which he appears—and even those in which he doesn't. Among other things, this close identification of Plato with Socrates requires Rowe to apply the principle of charity not just to the author, but to his creation. Since Plato and Socrates are one, Plato is fully accountable for all the arguments he assigns to Socrates: there is no dramatic wiggle-room for him to assign the latter any truly bad arguments for his own authorial purposes. (shrink)

Homer in general, and Helen in particular, were of great interest to the lyric poets. This article examines ways in which major fragments of Alcaeus, Ibycus, and Sappho select and combine aspects of the Iliadic Helen in order to pursue various poetic agendas, providing diverse perspectives on the complex issues of Helen's choice, agency, beauty, and eroticism. Since Helen, like Pandora, is a kalon kakon, it proves impossible to praise or blame her unambiguously.