Lantigua 1 Ramon. A lantigua Theories of Sexuality Prof.

Morris Kaplan February 19, 2012 Thus spoke Alcibiades The Implications of Alcibiades on Phaedrus and Aristophanes Speeches

The speech of Alcibiades in The Symposium, by Plato, is one of the oddest speeches given to commemorate the good of love. This speech is different from the others because it does not praise Eros but instead it praises Socrates, who had just given a speech before it. Alcibiades was a prominent Athenian states man and one of historys greatest traitors, yet in the symposium one does not see this character, he is presented as a desperate young lover who has gone crazy because his love has gone unrequited. And who does he love? None other than Socrates. His speech reveals so much about the nature of love and the nature of Socrates, perhaps too much. For this reason and because we can potentially go on forever on this, I will be focusing on the aspect of the speech that serve to supplement Diotamas account of love, mainly the latter of love. What I will try to show in this paper is how Alcibiades speech serves to discredit the other speeches formulated earlier in the symposium. The necessity of Alcibiades is unparalleled and serves to show the extent of Platos genius, especially given the historical ramifications that came from the interaction of both Socrates and Alcibiades during and after the Peloponnesian war. None the less, Alcibiades speech is one of the most important speeches in the symposium, in this essay we will cover some of its many implications, and mainly how it serves to prove wrong the other speeches and their implications of Eros as explained in the symposium. However due to length restriction I will only take into account Phaedrus and Aristophanes speeches. I will try to show how Alcibiades presence completely undermines there speech on the nature of love.

Lantigua 2 Alcibiades, without even hearing the other speeches is able to provide as a whole one single counter example to all of the speeches, except Diotamas. Plato does this not by explication in form of a counter argument to the other speeches, but rather he does this just by showing the distress that Alcibiades is portraying thru the story, it is almost like he is possessed to tell the truth, as he repeatedly comments to ask Socrates to interrupt, as he is telling the story, if he thinks it be a lie, but Socrates does no such thing, leading us to assume that what he is saying is in fact true. The first point I will make is on Phaedrus speech, he lays down what is thought to be honorable for the lover and the loved to do. He set lay down the mores of Athenian society when being in that situation. These mores are like molds that anyone who is in that position should take up to get the most out of it. The young loved is supposed to exchange sex for knowledge to the older lover. What is interesting is that he does not explicate what type of knowledge is adequate and if the trade is fair or not. That is to say that if Im supposed to exchange knowledge, he doesnt sate what happens If the knowledge that I hold is worth more than the pleasure that I will be getting from the sex with the young boy. Rather it is implied that all knowledge is worth less than the pleasure of sex with the young boy. This is the reason why the young boy is the loved and the older man the lover, for the lover is the holder of the desire and the young boy is the satisfier of the desire. This is backed up by the fact that the loved is supposed to hold out his sexual pleasure for a correct lover that has adequate knowledge. This puts all lovers, the older men, in competition with one another regardless of what knowledge they might have to teach, for the sex of the boy is what is valued not the knowledge they have. In this version of the story sex is what is implied to be the most valuable in the trade, indeed it is a trade. For in Phaedrus formulation the lover is the one who has the say as to who get his sex or who doesnt, and according to Athenian mores he is supposed to exchange it for the person who can benefit you the most, mainly with their knowledge or what they can teach the young boy. In this, the person who holds the power is the young boy, he has the power to

Lantigua 3 choose, whoever has the best knowledge, in exchange for his beauty. This is precisely one of the problems with Alcibiades and Socrates as explained on 218e My dear Alcibiades, you really must be no ordinary man if what you say about me is actually true and there is in me a certain power through which you might become a better person. You must see an irresistible beauty vastly superior to the attraction you possess. But if on this basis you are trying to strike a bargain with me your beauty over mine, then your intentions is to win a considerable advantage over me. What are you trying to acquire Is true beauty in return for apparent beauty in fact you intend to get gold in exchange for bronze. This is the apparent problem with Alcibiades as he is in love with Socrates not for Socrates sake but for the knowledge that he has. The expectation that he had was that Socrates was going to have to trade his knowledge for sex. Alcibiades is in a pickle because he wants what Socrates has and doesnt have anything of the same worth to trade him for it. This could be one of the woes of his frustration, why would he want the knowledge that Socrates has? Well, as explicated in the speech he possibly might want that knowledge that allows Socrates to do all of those things that he admired about him as he explained later in the speech. This is totally contradictory to Phaedrus speech, for in Phaedrus formulation sex is always more valuable than knowledge. One can estimate that the reason for the young boy to want to know, under Phaedrus speech, is , not only for seeking an advantage in politics, but also for the purpose of charming a young boy of his own when he comes of age. The reasons for knowing are being masked and it has to do a lot with seeking the most valuable, in Phaedrus speech, which is sex from the young boy. Under this speech knowledge becomes a tool to exchange for sexual pleasure and no knowledge is better than sexual beauty in pleasure. This than, frustrates Alcibiades for Socrates is not abiding to Athenian mores, for example the roles have switched between the loved and the lover as Alcibiades is the one doing the charming, and he is supposed to be charmed for he is the young boy that is loved and not the lover. This is also coming from a man who, as described by his

Lantigua 4 speech, has a future in politics for he is charming, intelligent and Beautiful but he persist on chasing Socrates. Socrates insist that he has all of those, so the question that one would have to ask given is what is Alcibiades missing that he desires not Socrates but Socrates wisdom? Given that he was the one that had to do all of the work to try and charm Socrates. The answer was given in the speech dedicated in praise of Socrates, what he wants is the knowledge that Socrates has, that allows him to be this ideal that Alcibiades praises he wants to have all of the traits that Socrates has. Now in Phaedrus speech this is not accounted for, the fact that knowledge might be better than just sexual pleasure, at least the knowledge that Socrates has is better. The second speech that I think Alcibiades undermines is Aristophanes speech. Again not by directly saying that it is wrong but by implying it in the speech by his praise of Socrates. Aristophanes states that lover in their desire are looking for their other half and to be one with that half. He states that that can only be done by the gods themselves, so the only thing that they have since the desire remains unfulfilled, is to have sex, which puts people together temporally. There are some difficulty that arise with this formulation, one being is that how does one know who their other half is? The solution is to try as many as possible, which implies to have as much sex as possible with different people, regardless of whether you are a lesbian, gay or heterosexual, there is a half out here for each and the only way to find them is to try as many people as possible. Thus again putting all emphasis on sex. Some justification that one might come up to say that Alcibiades fits this is that Alcibiades is in conflict with Socrates, whom he sees as his other half, but Socrates does not see Alcibiades as that. That is to say that Alcibiades thinks he has found his other half and the conflict comes from him trying to convince Socrates of that. But indeed that is not the case; we should break that by asking one question, what is it that Alcibiades desires from Socrates? It is certainly not eternal union through the satisfaction of desire although it might seem that way. What he wants from Socrates is his wisdom in exchange for it he is willing to have sex with Socrates. The end of is not sex, like I said before, Alcibiades does not want

Lantigua 5 Socrates for his own sake, but rather so Socrates can teach him the wisdom that allows him to do the things that Alcibiades praises him for. Aristophanes speech implies one that the end of love is just sexual relief in the search for the unity, and that we love people for their own sake because they are part of us. Clearly there is something to be gained by loving Socrates and it is not a union. Alcibiades believes that Socrates could make him a better person. Alcibiades after seeing all of the things that Socrates can do at war he decides to try and charm Socrates into teaching him all that he knows so then he could become like him for his own political advantage. Of course it must be added that Alcibiades must have, given what we know about him, had so many other lover offering their knowledge, and having all of these advantage, so for him to desire and to humiliate himself by switching the role he must have had something tremendous to gain by loving Socrates. It would sound absurd if he sacrificed all of that just for the sake of being and having sex with Socrates for the rest of eternity. Aristophanes speech, considering its fault of the only way of telling if this is ones other half is to try as many as possible, sounds to me more like an excuse to have as much sex as possible, and although sex was involved in Socrates and Alcibiades relationship it was not the ends but it was merely a tool for trading, as opposed to Aristophanes formulation where it was the ends of Eros. Now that we have formulated a thought as to how Alcibiades speech undermines Phaedrus and Aristophanes speeches. I will now touch briefly on how Diotamas speech is the most flexible and encompasses even Alcibiades love behavior at the end of the symposium, but its not necessarily a high level of love according to Diotamas latter of love. In the formulation that Diotama the end of love is not just sexual satisfaction and are also not limited by just loving a person and thats all. Rather love takes this more universal sense for the same love that a lover exhibits for the loved is no better than the love a shoe maker exhibits for shoe making. Thus love, like in Aristophanes speech where love pertains to the desire to become whole with your other half, is a desire for something but is not limited in the same way Aristophanes form is. This movement that Diotama makes, of stages that one has to make before

Lantigua 6 ascending, allows for further development and it might lead one to say, well maybe Alcibiades is just stuck on the stage where one is in love with one person that is beautiful, and this person will help this individual see the beautiful in all people thus beginning his transcendence through the stage of love that Diotama exemplifies in her speech. For Alcibiades is young, and at the age of getting a mentor. I will say, although Diotamas formulation still allows for Alcibiades love of Socrates, it is clear that the reason he has for being in love with Socrates are for political success. For he loves Socrates level of self-control courage and steadfastness and ability to charm any one with the prose he utters. He loves them and he wishes to possess them as he looked to trade his beauty for Socrates beauty, mainly these attributes that Socrates has. He wished for Socrates to teach them the knowledge that he had so that he would be able to have all of the qualities which he possessed. But Socrates says no to this trade as it would be an unfair trade. For this Alcibiades calls Socrates arrogant, he utters that Socrates faults were of arrogance, for in passage 219c I call on to you to deliver a verdict on Socrates arrogant behavior. But It was only arrogant because Socrates said plain and simple that the beauty that you possess is nowhere near the value of that which Socrates possesses. It would seem to me that Socrates had already begun his teachings to Alcibiades but yet every time he would leave his side he would regress to his aspiration for honor and public virtue. This leads me to believe that he was disappointed of not having Socrates teach him, and considering that maybe he got a glimpse of what Socrates had to teach him, he sought for it for his own advantage, mainly his success in Athenian politics. Although it must be said he admires Socrates this comes with a hint of jealousy of wanting to hold the beauty that Socrates has, his most disappointment is that he has nothing to trade him for Socrates knowledge as it is uttered on 219f Therefore I had no reason to be angry with him or to deprive him of my company, but neither did I have a way to win him over. This statement exemplifies his woes, he desires Socrates knowledge, because he got a taste of it, but neither does he have a way of acquiring it. For this reason in his speech there is a bit of spite but a huge sense of admiration and praise.

Lantigua 7 The reason I say that he hasnt even begun the movement in the latter is because of his reasons to want Socrates to teach him. In Diotama speech one has to engage in a the right type of love with the right type of lover who is bodily beautiful so he can, through conversation, find that person beautiful, and in Alcibiades case what he finds to be most beautiful is himself and he is looking to get what it is that Socrates has to make himself more beautiful. That is to say he has to a sense begun to see Socrates beauty of the soul, that is to say that Socrates soul is beautiful not his body, this may lead one to think that Alcibiades has surpassed the beauty of the body and gone up to see beautiful souls, ( as the second stage of Diotama latter of love) but he hasnt for in his attempt to trade his bodily beauty for Socrates soul beauty, the soul being more beautiful than the body, he shows that he is still in love with the body mainly his own body for him to think that would be a fair tradeoff and propose it to Socrates, when I reality one figures the beauty of the soul through hard work. He still finds himself bodily beautiful and no one else can compare to him, so he thought that if it should be anyone that Socrates would teach it would be him for he is the most beautiful. In the end we see how the speeches that were uttered did not meet up to the test of Alcibiades, I only showed that Phaedrus and Aristophanes speeches failed to cover Eros completely. In Phaedrus, because the mores did not govern the relationship between Socrates and Alcibiades, and in Phaedrus speech the assumption is always that sex is more valuable than knowledge, which is not true in Socrates and Alcibiades erotic love where it turns out that what Socrates had to offer Alcibiades was more valuable than what Alcibiades had to offer Socrates, a comparison between gold and bronze. We have also seen how Aristophanes account fails to grasp what it is that Alcibiades wants from Socrates and it certainly not union in intercourse, but rather knowledge. We have also seen how Alcibiades is not even in the beginning stages of the latter of love, for he hasnt passed love of his own bodily beauty to realize beauty in others, and it happened that he got a glimpse of beauty of the soul and now he wants to possess is it and is arrogant enough to think that his bodily beauty is of equal trade in beauty of soul.

Lantigua 8 Thus we can conclude that although we see these things, it must be said that The Symposium is an extremely complex text and it can under no circumstance be exhausted in five pages, and if I were asked I dont think It can be exhausted at all for it has lots to teach, not only on the nature of love but on a number of other topics.

Lantigua 9

Bibliography Plato, trans. M.C Howatson The symposium, New York, Cambridge University Press. 2008. E book.