Book Review of Great Dialogues of Plato

I may seem to some like the most ignorant, ill-bred cretin ever to attempt to assume airs for what I am about to state here, for the reverse recommendation, as it were, that I am about to give regarding Great Dialogues of Plato, translated by W. H. D. Rouse: my advice is to avoid this book. There is no question that Plato (427-347 BC), and his eminent teacher, Socrates (469-399 BC), have together formed the crux of Greek philosophy, and while tremendous credit must be given to the late Dr. Rouse for accomplishing such a Herculean labor, the result of said labor is, to the modern reader, almost as laborious.

First printed in 1956 and edited by Eric H. Warmington and Philip G. Rouse, Great Dialogues of Plato is divided into several works, namely Ion, Meno, Symposium, The Republic, The Apology, Crito and Phaedo. The Republic, with its accompanying introduction and ten books, comprises the majority of this compendium. Rouse mentions in a footnote that The Republic was not divided into ten separate books until many centuries after Plato's death, an interesting fact of which I was not aware. Supplementary to the texts are the Greek alphabet, and a pronunciation guide to the dozens of Greek names that appear throughout this 528-page volume.

Since Socrates was an orator and not a writer per se, his greatest and most famous disciple, Plato, took it upon himself to compose a series of hypothetical conversations between Socrates and his numerous friends and acquaintances. These conversations, or dialogues, cover in excruciating detail topics such as love, virtue, justice, forms of government, reincarnation and the immortality of the soul.

The biggest problem with Great Dialogues of Plato is that everything centers around Socrates, overshadowing the author of these texts, who seems as if he himself never had an original thought or a personal opinion on anything. Of course, that Plato was a mindless imitator is not true, but the reader easily loses sight of this amidst all of the ". . .Socrates said," and "according to Socrates," and such. Even Rouse's preface to Dialogues focuses almost entirely on Socrates, not Plato. However, in a footnote on page 134, Book I of The Republic, Rouse writes that Plato is the first person known to have said that ". . .it is not the work of the just man to injure. . .whether to injure a friend or anyone else." But this sentiment Plato modestly attributes to his illustrious mentor.

The footnotes are copious, but in most cases, absolutely necessary. In addition to translating Plato from the ancient Greek, Rouse had the titanic task of translating countless social, political and historical references which all but the best scholars of antiquity will miss. The footnotes average about one or two per page, sometimes as many as eight or nine, which occasionally breaks the pace of the Dialogues (the pace being slightly faster than a snail's!) but this cannot be helped. Even with the expert guidance of Rouse, some words, phrases or concepts are irretrievably lost in translation, which Rouse readily admits with the disclaimer "the Greek text is unclear." Often, Rouse is forced to explain a pun on two Greek words, a pun which would obviously elude the modern reader in English.

There are constant references to The Odyssey and The Iliad, particularly the latter. This demonstrates how thoroughly ingrained into the culture of the ancient Greeks these books were, comparable to the influence of The Bible on more modern society. Fully 74 of the 607 footnotes in Dialogues refer to the Homeric epics.

If I had to choose which texts to read -in the event that merely reading a cogent synopsis would not be an option- I would select Symposium, The Republic, and Phaedo. The Symposium I would include because it is of some substance and among the better-known, and deals with Socrates and a number of friends who gather at a banquet, where they decide to play a "parlor game." That game consists of each person giving his description of love. The Republic I would select simply because it is The Republic, the most famous of Plato's works, and contains the famous allegory of "the cave." Phaedo deals with the death of Socrates, who was found guilty by a vote of 280 to 221 of "corrupting the youth of Athens," and subsequently sentenced to death. Even I must admit that there is something admirable in Socrates' stoic acceptance of his impending demise, and how he strolls about his cell with his closest friends, philosophizing until the very end. He cheerfully chugs the hemlock-laced libation, waiting patiently as the poison creeps up to his heart.

Ostensibly done in deference to his master, the style of the Dialogues, in which Socrates explains, argues and contradicts his confused companions, might just as easily have been written as expository essays. Socrates does almost all of the talking, and the responses that he receives are often limited to "Yes, indeed it does, Socrates," "Quite true, yes," "By the gods, of course." The other people are almost irrelevant to these "dialogues."

I feel that a word of explanation, or at least a few footnotes, would better serve the text of Symposium, particularly during the speech by the drunken Alcibiades, when he proclaims that Socrates -who had a wife and children- was his best lover, and reminisces about lying down beside him. I do not consider myself to be homophobic, but I cringed at this. But to the ancient Greeks, men, even married ones, with male lovers were not considered abnormal or aberrant, and despite the fact that they had physical relations with each other, many men maintained that their love was of the purest form, spiritual and intellectual. No one at the Symposium was in the least put off by Alcibiades' words.

Some enduring themes nevertheless shine through in Great Dialogues of Plato. That Socrates was a wise, just and honest man is evident, assuming of course that Plato's interpretation of his master's principles were accurate. A very progressive idea surfaces in The Republic -in which Socrates, Glaucon, Polemarchos, Thrasymarchos, Adeimantos and Cephalos discuss the perfect, hypothetical city state- that of including women in the government. Strangely, they make no mention of women's suffrage, perhaps assuming that the two go hand in hand. Other beliefs and opinions put forth seem almost to reflect Judaeo-Christian heritage, although Plato, Socrates and their contemporaries were officially pagans. For example, Socrates speaks frequently of "God" rather than simply "the gods," confusing because the ancient Greeks clearly espoused polytheism. Maybe this is an example of liberties taken by the translator.

In summary, I feel that familiarity with Socrates, Plato, and many concepts of basic philosophy are important for the cultured, well-rounded individual. I simply do not recommend this particular text for would-be inquirers. Read a concise summary, buy the Cliff Notes, or explore online sources such as Spark Notes. These will help you to understand and intelligently discuss Classical ideals, but Great Dialogues of Plato will probably just confuse you.