8/2/2019 Review- About Plato and About Art

1/3

Review: About Plato and about Art

Author(s): I. M. CrombieSource: The Classical Review, New Series, Vol. 29, No. 1 (1979), pp. 76-77Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3062732 .

Accessed: 14/07/2011 07:53

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge University Press and The Classical Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve

and extend access to The Classical Review.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cuphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=classicalhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3062732?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cuphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cuphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3062732?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=classicalhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup

8/2/2019 Review- About Plato and About Art

2/3

of these stories. Can even a fictitious anecdote help date its subject's life? Despitesuch occasional anachronisms as Gorgias' disparagement of the Gorgias (anec-dote 37), the Platonic biographers' record in this regard appears fairly healthy.Finally, it is hard to avoid remarking that the earliest extant life of Plato,that in the Index Academicorum Herculanensis, survives in a papyrus whichhas not been examined since 1904. Mekler's edition, although a work of excep-tional quality, was produced without the technical aids which are today enablingus to improve the texts of many Herculaneum papyri. Until somebody under-takes a new edition, no truly definitive work on Platonic biography can bewritten.Christ's College, Cambridge D. N. SEDLEY

ABOUT PLATO AND ABOUT ARTIRISMURDOCH: he Fire and the Sun: Why Plato Banished theArtists. Pp. 89. Oxford: University Press, 1977. Cloth, ?2-50.The sub-title reminds one that too much light can be dazzling. This essay is asilluminating as it is obscure. It is about the relation between the sensible and theintelligible worlds (the fire and the sun of the Simile of the Cave), and about therole that art can play as a mediator between sensibility and reason. MissMurdoch's purpose is to try to understand what it is about art that Plato con-centrated too much on, so that, for all the importance he attached to beautyand to eros, he came, on the whole, to under-estimate the mediating role of art.Her method is to expound Plato's developing views on ethical and metaphysicalmatters, fitting what he says about art and artifice (for example his views aboutthe limited value, indeed the danger, of philosophical writing) into this account,and breaking off, whenever convenient, to introduce by way of parallel or con-trast the related views of Kant, Freud, Tolstoy, Kierkegaard, and (passim, andoften rather gnomically) Murdoch. One gets the impression that the systems ofmetaphysicians and theologians are a kind of mythical representation of aperennial philosophy which transcends them, and in which Good is sovereign,and is also the Real and the Beautiful, and in which the eros which beautyexcites can counter-act the tendency of human 'egoism' (or concern with thetrivial and mundane) to evade the sovereignty of Good. Since this perennialphilosophy can so easily be found in the Phaedrus, the problem becomes acutewhy Plato should have, on the whole, rated art as eikasia. The answer is thatPlato was too vividly aware of the negative half of the truth, stated in theSophist, that God is the only genuine artist. 'The Demiurge is attempting againstinsuperable difficulties to create a harmonious and just world. The (good) humanartist, whom Plato regardsas such a base caricature, is trying to portray thepartially failed world as it is, and in doing so to produce something pleasing andbeautiful' (p. 80). Again (p. 65): 'Art is dangerous chiefly because it apes thespiritual and subtly disguises and trivializes it'; not, I think, that in Plato's viewit necessarily does so, but that for the most part it does so, and that 'the desire tobecome the Demiurge and reorganize chaos in accordance with one's ownexcellent plan' (p. 69) is the strongest motive to art as it is also the strongestmotive to philosophy. The 'harsh but inspiring truth of the distance betweenman and God' can be covered up with 'charming imagery' by the artist as it may

of these stories. Can even a fictitious anecdote help date its subject's life? Despitesuch occasional anachronisms as Gorgias' disparagement of the Gorgias (anec-dote 37), the Platonic biographers' record in this regard appears fairly healthy.Finally, it is hard to avoid remarking that the earliest extant life of Plato,that in the Index Academicorum Herculanensis, survives in a papyrus whichhas not been examined since 1904. Mekler's edition, although a work of excep-tional quality, was produced without the technical aids which are today enablingus to improve the texts of many Herculaneum papyri. Until somebody under-takes a new edition, no truly definitive work on Platonic biography can bewritten.Christ's College, Cambridge D. N. SEDLEY

ABOUT PLATO AND ABOUT ARTIRISMURDOCH: he Fire and the Sun: Why Plato Banished theArtists. Pp. 89. Oxford: University Press, 1977. Cloth, ?2-50.The sub-title reminds one that too much light can be dazzling. This essay is asilluminating as it is obscure. It is about the relation between the sensible and theintelligible worlds (the fire and the sun of the Simile of the Cave), and about therole that art can play as a mediator between sensibility and reason. MissMurdoch's purpose is to try to understand what it is about art that Plato con-centrated too much on, so that, for all the importance he attached to beautyand to eros, he came, on the whole, to under-estimate the mediating role of art.Her method is to expound Plato's developing views on ethical and metaphysicalmatters, fitting what he says about art and artifice (for example his views aboutthe limited value, indeed the danger, of philosophical writing) into this account,and breaking off, whenever convenient, to introduce by way of parallel or con-trast the related views of Kant, Freud, Tolstoy, Kierkegaard, and (passim, andoften rather gnomically) Murdoch. One gets the impression that the systems ofmetaphysicians and theologians are a kind of mythical representation of aperennial philosophy which transcends them, and in which Good is sovereign,and is also the Real and the Beautiful, and in which the eros which beautyexcites can counter-act the tendency of human 'egoism' (or concern with thetrivial and mundane) to evade the sovereignty of Good. Since this perennialphilosophy can so easily be found in the Phaedrus, the problem becomes acutewhy Plato should have, on the whole, rated art as eikasia. The answer is thatPlato was too vividly aware of the negative half of the truth, stated in theSophist, that God is the only genuine artist. 'The Demiurge is attempting againstinsuperable difficulties to create a harmonious and just world. The (good) humanartist, whom Plato regardsas such a base caricature, is trying to portray thepartially failed world as it is, and in doing so to produce something pleasing andbeautiful' (p. 80). Again (p. 65): 'Art is dangerous chiefly because it apes thespiritual and subtly disguises and trivializes it'; not, I think, that in Plato's viewit necessarily does so, but that for the most part it does so, and that 'the desire tobecome the Demiurge and reorganize chaos in accordance with one's ownexcellent plan' (p. 69) is the strongest motive to art as it is also the strongestmotive to philosophy. The 'harsh but inspiring truth of the distance betweenman and God' can be covered up with 'charming imagery' by the artist as it may

766 THECLASSICAL EVIEWHECLASSICAL EVIEW

8/2/2019 Review- About Plato and About Art

3/3

also be concealed by the 'metaphysical ladders' of the philosopher. (We remem-ber that Plato also distrusted the sungrammata which are the philosopher'sartefacts).Perhaps it is clear from what I have said that the essay aims to improve one's

understanding rather than one's knowledge. There is little exegetical novelty,anyhow on points of detail, in Miss Murdoch's account of Plato's views, whichis on the whole traditionalist. But the picture of the development of the Theoryof Forms is individual and striking. Plato moves from a belief in perfect partic-ulars, through the high status given to psuche in the Sophist, to 'the great un-created Particulars' (p. 55) which play the role of the Father (the cosmos beingthe Son, and the Demiurge the Holy Ghost) in the Trinity of the Timaeus. Onemay or may not wholly believe this story of Plato's intellectual growth (thedetails of which I have, of course, left out); indeed one may be a little dazzledby it; but I think that, when one's eyes have become adjusted, some things maybe more clearly seen.This essay, then, is rewarding, but not easy. Miss Murdoch begins on p. 1,starts a new paragraphfrom time to time, and stops on p. 89. No sub-headings,no signposts; no notes, no index, no bibliography. I seldom understand morethan half the time why people do what they do in a Murdoch novel, and Idoubt whether I understand more than half the time why Miss Murdoch movesfrom one point to the next in this essay. And at least a quarter of the sentenceswashed over my head without my understanding them. 'The pierced structure ofthe art object whereby its sense flows into life is an essential part of its mortalnature' (p. 85) for example. Not, however, without leaving something behind.The student who wants plain information about Plato's views on art will notfind it here. But he will find something else, which he may or may not finddigestible, both about Plato and about art.WadhamCollege, Oxford I. M. CROMBIE

ARISTOTLE'S DE IDEISWALTER LESZL:II 'De ideis' di Aristotele e la teoria platonica delleidee. Pp. 360. Florence: Olschki, 1975. Paper, L. 9,500.One of the useful aspects of this volume is that it includes D. Harlfinger's newtext of the passages of Alexander's Metaphysics commentary generally thoughtto draw on the IIep' ibecw (PI). Harlfinger bases his text on the six manuscriptshe considers earlier than 1400; of these he rates O (collated here for the firsttime) as more important than A, on which Hayduck and other earlier editorsrelied. The recensio altera of LF is printed fully, in parallel. Leszl (L.) adds atranslation of his own, covering those parts of the vulgate he believes to derivefrom PI. (Two minor puzzles: i) L. generally translates Harlfinger, but at 86.12translates Hayduck instead. ii) Why does the text not include 97.17-19, whichnot only has at least some connection with PI ('quasi certamente', p. 341), butalso appears in the translation?) There then follows the main part of the book,which consists chiefly in patient analyses of the Platonist arguments cited byAristotle in PI, and his criticisms of them.L. is generally uncontroversial on the reconstruction of PI. He considersAlexander reliable as paraphrast, though less good as an interpreter of Aristotle:

also be concealed by the 'metaphysical ladders' of the philosopher. (We remem-ber that Plato also distrusted the sungrammata which are the philosopher'sartefacts).Perhaps it is clear from what I have said that the essay aims to improve one's

understanding rather than one's knowledge. There is little exegetical novelty,anyhow on points of detail, in Miss Murdoch's account of Plato's views, whichis on the whole traditionalist. But the picture of the development of the Theoryof Forms is individual and striking. Plato moves from a belief in perfect partic-ulars, through the high status given to psuche in the Sophist, to 'the great un-created Particulars' (p. 55) which play the role of the Father (the cosmos beingthe Son, and the Demiurge the Holy Ghost) in the Trinity of the Timaeus. Onemay or may not wholly believe this story of Plato's intellectual growth (thedetails of which I have, of course, left out); indeed one may be a little dazzledby it; but I think that, when one's eyes have become adjusted, some things maybe more clearly seen.This essay, then, is rewarding, but not easy. Miss Murdoch begins on p. 1,starts a new paragraphfrom time to time, and stops on p. 89. No sub-headings,no signposts; no notes, no index, no bibliography. I seldom understand morethan half the time why people do what they do in a Murdoch novel, and Idoubt whether I understand more than half the time why Miss Murdoch movesfrom one point to the next in this essay. And at least a quarter of the sentenceswashed over my head without my understanding them. 'The pierced structure ofthe art object whereby its sense flows into life is an essential part of its mortalnature' (p. 85) for example. Not, however, without leaving something behind.The student who wants plain information about Plato's views on art will notfind it here. But he will find something else, which he may or may not finddigestible, both about Plato and about art.WadhamCollege, Oxford I. M. CROMBIE

ARISTOTLE'S DE IDEISWALTER LESZL:II 'De ideis' di Aristotele e la teoria platonica delleidee. Pp. 360. Florence: Olschki, 1975. Paper, L. 9,500.One of the useful aspects of this volume is that it includes D. Harlfinger's newtext of the passages of Alexander's Metaphysics commentary generally thoughtto draw on the IIep' ibecw (PI). Harlfinger bases his text on the six manuscriptshe considers earlier than 1400; of these he rates O (collated here for the firsttime) as more important than A, on which Hayduck and other earlier editorsrelied. The recensio altera of LF is printed fully, in parallel. Leszl (L.) adds atranslation of his own, covering those parts of the vulgate he believes to derivefrom PI. (Two minor puzzles: i) L. generally translates Harlfinger, but at 86.12translates Hayduck instead. ii) Why does the text not include 97.17-19, whichnot only has at least some connection with PI ('quasi certamente', p. 341), butalso appears in the translation?) There then follows the main part of the book,which consists chiefly in patient analyses of the Platonist arguments cited byAristotle in PI, and his criticisms of them.L. is generally uncontroversial on the reconstruction of PI. He considersAlexander reliable as paraphrast, though less good as an interpreter of Aristotle:

THE CLASSICAL REVIEWHE CLASSICAL REVIEW 777