By Robinson, Steven. 1998
Read or Download Drama, dialogue and dialectic: Dionysos and the dionysiac in Plato's Symposium PDF
Similar nonfiction_3 books
It is time to permit the CATS out of the bag . . . interest may need killed the proverbial cat, yet with out it very genuine achievements might by no means take place. With this booklet as your advisor, you’ll how one can spark your innate interest, pounce on difficulties in methods you by no means imagined, and revel in better luck and delight at work—and on your own lifestyles.
- Autism : Neural Basis and Treatment Possibilities (Novartis Foundation Symposium 251)
- Historisches Wörterbuch der jüdischen Schriftsteller und ihrer Werke
- The IBM Totalstorage Solutions Handbook (IBM Redbooks)
Additional info for Drama, dialogue and dialectic: Dionysos and the dionysiac in Plato's Symposium
Socrates, who is merely humaa. can be tebom only symboücally, dming this Me and before bis acnial death- Socrates, then, unüke Dionysos, mut be portrayed as both "dying" and "reviving" at one and the same tirne. The problem with such an account (as with Bacon's, which makes the dialogues into a juxtaposition or mixture of the tragic and comic) is that it makes Plato out to be quite favourabIy disposed towards dramatic poetry as an art form. There is, of course, an ancient tradition that Plato had originally intended to be a tragedian, and had even composed tragedies More he met Socrates; these two commentators see the mature Plato as once again giving rein to his youthful ambitions.
It is even possible that this is itself set during the Lmaion dionysia. Though drama and svmwsia have littie or nothing to do with each other, both are closely connected to the figure of Dionysos. Plato has thus created a doubly-dionysiac context by combining them in this way. 4) Eros A third dionysiac aspect is the topic of discussion: Eros, the god of erotic love. Here we m u t tread carefdy; eros (sexual desire) holds a prominent place in generally, but this was not necessarily on account of Dionysos.
Another problem with Krllger's nading is that it seems to imply that Plato is openly declaring in the that both he himself and Socrates are guilty of the The fact that Aiki'biades gives this praise grudgingly, and even declans, There can be no teconciliation between you and met' m the context of references to violence (213d6), might appear to support Kr(iger's reading, but only if tbis is tbe god speakhg and not Aikibiades penonaiiy. This threat of violence is inconsisrcnt with the nature of the praise Aiikbiades gives, and while such inccmsistency is understandable in the case of a human sou1 being puiied in opposite directions (precisely AUo'bades' chunstance here), it does not seem understandable in the case of the god Dionysos himself.
Drama, dialogue and dialectic: Dionysos and the dionysiac in Plato's Symposium by Robinson, Steven. 1998