(37a12).

In the end, it was unclear to me why the ethical purpose of cosmology could
not be served as well if the cosmos as a generated god remained distinct from the
demiurge.
Now the present cosmos is a combination of intelligence and disorder. In so far as
intelligence dominates, C. rightly argues, the cosmos presents a model for how we may
control the disorderly element in our own lives. This is clearly true of the Timaeus;
and C. seems on rm ground when she argues that the discussion in the Philebus of
the four kinds in the current universe is geared to articulating the proper relationship
between intelligence and pleasure in the good life. However, C.s addition of the
Politicus myth and Laws 10 to this picture creates complications. On the traditional
interpretation, the Politicus myth presents the current state of the world as one of
increasing disorder, brought about by gods absence. But how can such a world
present an ethical paradigm to us, as C. would like it to? In response, C. argues that
the current world is in fact teleologically ordered and presided over by god. Her
evidence here seems tenuous. For example, she uses (p. 141) the gifts of the gods (re,
etc.) to show the continued care of the gods for us during the age of Zeus, but at 274d
these are clearly premised on the care of the gods no longer being available to us.
As for Laws 10, C. seeks to dispel the notion that cosmic evil comes from an evil
world soul again a threat to the status of the cosmos as moral exemplar by
showing that the evil in fact arises from the human soul. This view of the origin of
cosmic evil shows, C. argues, how Plato now conceives of ethics and cosmology as
more strongly interdependent: not only are our actions determined by the cosmos,
they also in turn determine it in a way that makes C. think of the message of modern
environmentalism. But, if so, we may wonder whether the cosmos is still certain to
present a moral paradigm to us. To the extent that our actions make the cosmos itself
evil, it seems to undermine C.s previous contrast between the domination of
intelligence over unreason in the universe as a given, but as an achievement for us
(p. 102).
On this and other issues one may have the impression that C. tinkers with Platonic
cosmology to make it support favoured philosophical positions (ethical populism,
avoidance of mindbody dualism, environmentalism). While C.s coverage of the
literature is extensive, it should also be said that several of her polemics most of
them conducted through 67 pages of endnotes hardly do justice to the intentions
and strengths of the opposition. (J. Lennox, G. Vlastos and M. Frede seemed to me
particularly hard done by.) None the less, this book represents a bold and signicant
attempt to bring out why Plato thought we could learn about the good from the
cosmos.
Oxford University T. K. JOHANSEN
thomas.johansen@philosophy.ox.ac.uk
THE SYMPOSIUM
HiN1r (R.) Platos Symposium. Pp. xiv + 150. Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2004. Paper, 9.99 (Cased, 45). ISBN:
978-0-19-516080-2 (978-0-19-516079-6 hbk).
doi:10.1017/S0009840X06003040
In this short volume, the second of a series entitled Oxford Approaches to Classical
Literature, Richard Hunter attempts to combine the dual aim proposed by the series
38 1nr ci:ssi c:i rvi rv
The Classical Review vol. 57 no. 1 The Classical Association 2007; all rights reserved
editors, namely to provide an accessible introduction to the rst-time reader
of Platos Symposium while simultaneously oering an essay in criticism that
does justice to [its] subtlety and complexity. The outcome, which perhaps
inevitably proves more successful in the latter than the former aim, is a highly
condensed exposition of the Symposium combined with a scholarly appraisal of
its background, philosophical arguments and literary afterlife. The rst sentence of
the opening chapter is fairly representative of the style and density of H.s
exposition:
Platos Symposium is the account of a (presumably ctional) gathering in the house of the
Athenian tragic poet Agathon to celebrate his rst victory in 416 n.c. in one of the great
dramatic festivals of the city; the work itself was probably composed in the period 385370
n.c., and belongs to the same broad period as some of Platos other most famous works, such
as Phaedo, Phaedrus, and Republic.
To this sentence, with its demands on the readers readiness to engage with
complex cultural, chronological and literary assumptions, are attached two not
insubstantial footnotes citing three scholarly articles as well as two ancient works
(Athenaeus Deipnosophistae and Xenophons Symposium) with which anyone
unacquainted with Platos Symposium is likely to be even less familiar. H. would
be fortunate, therefore, to realise the fervent hope he expresses in his Preface
that this book will persuade those [who have not read the Symposium] that they
should become acquainted with Platos marvellous work without delay; such
beginners would indeed be better advised to embark without further ado on
a readable translation of the Symposium with a brief introduction and helpful
notes. Those, however, who are already familiar with the dialogue will nd in H.s
work many new observations and insights, thanks to the authors scholarly scope
and wide-ranging reference to ancient texts, modern scholarship and scattered sites
of Platonic reception. In the last of these areas (the subject of the books last
chapter, The Morning After) H. discusses sympotic revisions ranging from
Plutarch to Plotinus, and from Renaissance commentators such as Ficino and
Erasmus to a 1998 stage show called Hedwig and the Angry Inch. He notes how
elements of the Symposium have inuenced treatments of love, and specically
questions of homosexual desire, in authors such as E.M. Forster, psychoanalysts
such as Freud and Lacan, and a U.S. Federal Appeals Court judge called
Posner who published a 1992 study on the history of the relations between law
and sexual behaviour. The careful scholarship and wealth of compact detail oered
by H. make this book one that can be appreciated on many levels by academic
readers; but unfortunately even the most dedicated beginner would be unlikely to
nd it a protreptic to reading Plato, let alone discover from it that in the Symposium
Plato has produced a work of literature which is apt to inspire not just admiration,
but love.
Jesus College, Oxford ARMAND D ANGOUR
armand.dangour@jesus.ox.ac.uk
1nr ci:ssi c:i rvi rv 39