diff --git "a/export_republic.tsv" "b/export_republic.tsv" --- "a/export_republic.tsv" +++ "b/export_republic.tsv" @@ -18,27 +18,27 @@ Glaucon - CEPHALUS - SOCRATES Accordingly we went with Polemarchus to his house; and there we foundhis brothers Lysias and Euthydemus, and with them Thrasymachus theChalcedonian, Charmantides the Paeanian, and Cleitophon the son ofAristonymus. There too was Cephalus the father of Polemarchus, whomI had not seen for a long time, and I thought him very much aged.He was seated on a cushioned chair, and had a garland on his head,for he had been sacrificing in the court; and there were some otherchairs in the room arranged in a semicircle, upon which we sat downby him. He saluted me eagerly, and then he said: -- You don't come to see me, Socrates, as often as you ought: If I werestill able to go and see you I would not ask you to come to me. Butat my age I can hardly get to the city, and therefore you should comeoftener to the Piraeus. For let me tell you, that the more the pleasuresof the body fade away, the greater to me is the pleasure and charmof conversation. Do not then deny my request, but make our house yourresort and keep company with these young men; we are old friends,and you will be quite at home with us. I replied: There is nothing which for my part I like better, Cephalus,than conversing with aged men; for I regard them as travellers whohave gone a journey which I too may have to go, and of whom I oughtto enquire, whether the way is smooth and easy, or rugged and difficult.And this is a question which I should like to ask of you who havearrived at that time which the poets call the 'threshold of old age'--Is life harder towards the end, or what report do you give of it?" "Summary: Socrates and Glaucon go to the Piraeus to offer prayers and watch a festival. They are approached by Polemarchus, who invites them to wait for him. The group decides to stay and discuss various topics, including conversation with aged men. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation Active character: Socrates, Glaucon, Polemarchus, Adeimantus, Niceratus, Cephalus, Lysias, Euthydemus, Thrasymachus, Charmantides, Cleitophon Absolute place: A clubhouse in Los Angeles Fuzzy place: Piraeus, city -Diegetic time: A few minutes" You come to the Piraeus, Socrates,” he said, “and yet you will not attend the festival of the goddess! To-day we celebrate the feast of Artemis in her birthplace; for the goddess herself would be ill-pleased if we forgot her. Come, then, and watch the procession.” “What manner of procession?” I asked. “The procession is one of those which take place only once every four years, and are a great marvel,” he answered. “In addition to all the other gods and goddesses, they bring in Kore and Dionysos from Eleutherae, and conduct them back again at night. Do you wish to see them? Or shall we first go to the clubhouse, where you may rest while I tell you the names of the generals and other officials?” “I am going to see the procession,” I replied. “Come on, Glaucon!” As we turned away, Polemarchus said: “I wonder what made you start so quickly when you heard that I was coming, Socrates.” “Why, no reason at all,” I answered. “Did anyone say that I did start?” “Yes, I saw you myself,” he said. “Why did you do it?” “Well, my good friend,” I replied, “it is not very easy to explain; but I thought that I had better put on shoes and gird up my cloak before I went to see such a fine sight as you promised me.” He laughed as he said: “Socrates, how foolish you are! We are not going to walk much, because we are staying to wait for Adeimantus and Niceratus, who are coming to join us here. They will be along soon now, and then we will go to the clubhouse. But in the meantime, let us sit down and talk with each other.” “By all means,” I said, and sat down beside him. A little later Adeimantus and Niceratus came up, and Cephalus with Lysias and Euthydemus, and Thrasymachus and Charmantides and Cleitophon, until there were a good many of us altogether. Then Cephalus said: “It appears that you have been to a lot of places, Socrates; you must be able to tell us some news about the city.” “That depends,” I said, “on what kind of news you want to hear. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "You know that the city will be watching us, and that if we come back without a fair reason they will probably send some one to look for us; so please tell us the truth. What is your idea?"""" I have no idea,"" he said, ""unless it's just coincidence."" Socrates and Glaucon looked at each other. """"Well, we'll go along with you,"""" Socrates said. """"If nothing else comes up, we can always say we were going to the races."""" So the three of them went down the street to a taxi stand. The cab took them out through the northern part of the city to the Piraeus, where they got out near the clubhouse. It was now almost dark, but there were a number of people about, and they could see the lights in the clubhouse. As they stood there discussing what they should do, Polemarchus suddenly appeared beside them, dressed in his racing outfit. He looked rather pale, but otherwise seemed all right. Well, gentlemen,"" he said, ""I'm glad you came. You'll have to wait here for me a few minutes, though, while I put on my uniform. Then we'll go in together."""" Do you expect to run?"" Glaucon asked. Yes,"" Polemarchus said. ""The race won't start for over an hour yet, so I thought I'd hang around here for a while and talk with some of the fellows. If you don't mind waiting, that is."""" Not at all,"" Socrates said. ""We'll watch the festival from here. Then when you're ready we'll go in with you."""" Thank you,"" Polemarchus said. ""It's very good of you."" Adeimantus and Niceratus soon joined him, and after talking with them for a minute he went into the clubhouse. A few minutes later Cephalus and Lysias and Euthydemus and Thrasymachus and Charmantides and Cleitophon also appeared. All of them were dressed in their racing outfits except Cephalus, who wore a plain suit. There were a great many people coming and going in front of the clubhouse, and the two men stood talking earnestly together for several minutes before noticing the three strangers. When they did notice them, they walked over and greeted them. We're glad to see you,"" Cephalus said. ""I hope everything is all right."""" Everything is fine,"" Socrates said. ""We're just waiting here for Polemarchus. He told us he wanted to talk with us before he goes in. Where is he?"""" He went in about five minutes ago,"" Cephalus said. ""He didn't say anything about wanting to talk with you, though."""" No,"" Socrates said. ""But I suppose he just forgot."" Just then Adeimantus came out of the clubhouse. He nodded to Socrates and Glaucon and walked past them toward a cab stand. But as he reached the curb he stopped and turned around. " 1 1 "I will tell you, Socrates, he said, what my own feeling is. Men ofmy age flock together; we are birds of a feather, as the old proverbsays; and at our meetings the tale of my acquaintance commonly is--I cannot eat, I cannot drink; the pleasures of youth and love arefled away: there was a good time once, but now that is gone, and lifeis no longer life. Some complain of the slights which are put uponthem by relations, and they will tell you sadly of how many evilstheir old age is the cause. But to me, Socrates, these complainersseem to blame that which is not really in fault. For if old age werethe cause, I too being old, and every other old man, would have feltas they do. But this is not my own experience, nor that of otherswhom I have known. How well I remember the aged poet Sophocles, whenin answer to the question, How does love suit with age, Sophocles,--are you still the man you were? Peace, he replied; most gladly haveI escaped the thing of which you speak; I feel as if I had escapedfrom a mad and furious master. His words have often occurred to mymind since, and they seem as good to me now as at the time when heuttered them. For certainly old age has a great sense of calm andfreedom; when the passions relax their hold, then, as Sophocles says,we are freed from the grasp not of one mad master only, but of many.The truth is, Socrates, that these regrets, and also the complaintsabout relations, are to be attributed to the same cause, which isnot old age, but men's characters and tempers; for he who is of acalm and happy nature will hardly feel the pressure of age, but tohim who is of an opposite disposition youth and age are equally aburden. I listened in admiration, and wanting to draw him out, that he mightgo on --Yes, Cephalus, I said: but I rather suspect that people ingeneral are not convinced by you when you speak thus; they think thatold age sits lightly upon you, not because of your happy disposition,but because you are rich, and wealth is well known to be a great comforter. You are right, he replied; they are not convinced: and there is somethingin what they say; not, however, so much as they imagine. I might answerthem as Themistocles answered the Seriphian who was abusing him andsaying that he was famous, not for his own merits but because he wasan Athenian: 'If you had been a native of my country or I of yours,neither of us would have been famous.' And to those who are not richand are impatient of old age, the same reply may be made; for to thegood poor man old age cannot be a light burden, nor can a bad richman ever have peace with himself. May I ask, Cephalus, whether your fortune was for the most part inheritedor acquired by you? Acquired! Socrates; do you want to know how much I acquired? In theart of making money I have been midway between my father and grandfather:for my grandfather, whose name I bear, doubled and trebled the valueof his patrimony, that which he inherited being much what I possessnow; but my father Lysanias reduced the property below what it isat present: and I shall be satisfied if I leave to these my sons notless but a little more than I received. That was why I asked you the question, I replied, because I see thatyou are indifferent about money, which is a characteristic ratherof those who have inherited their fortunes than of those who haveacquired them; the makers of fortunes have a second love of moneyas a creation of their own, resembling the affection of authors fortheir own poems, or of parents for their children, besides that naturallove of it for the sake of use and profit which is common to themand all men. And hence they are very bad company, for they can talkabout nothing but the praises of wealth. That is true, he said." "Summary: The speaker reflects on the complaints of old age and discusses the impact of character and wealth on one's experience of aging. -Enunciation: Dialogue -Tone: Hardboiled -Speech standard: Informal, raw +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation Active character: Socrates, Cephalus -Quoted character: Sophocles, Themistocles" “Sophocles,” said he, “was in his riper years a poet; yet the chorus of the Antigone says: ‘Old age hath deafened my ears.’ And Themistocles, though he was a man of forty when he saved Hellas by his wisdom, and though he had all the honours which men could give him after that, yet, at the last, when he was an old man, the Athenians put him into banishment. Wherefore he made this epitaph: ‘I am a suppliant of the earth, because I have been deceived of Athens.’” “You forget,” said I, “that you are not now the same person as you were then.” “And what makes me think that?” “Why, why, if you were the same, you would be living still, and would have been living these many years.” “Nay, my good friend,” said he, “the greatest glory of old age is to have lived long.” “And yet,” said I, “if it were true that old age brought with it sorrow, and no other advantage, it were better for you to have died young, and so escaped it.” “By the gods!” he cried, “do not say that! For who would choose to be young again, if he might not live any longer than he did then? Nay, I should rather be a servant to a poor man and live to a hundred years, than be a king and die at twenty. But as it is, there is nothing which brings more trouble to a man than wealth, and especially great wealth. +Quoted character: Sophocles, Themistocles" "Ego vero cum paulo senex sum factus, totum coepi esse convivia mea querentem, quod mihi absit; nam in his rebus nemo deest consilii mei. [36] Atqui haec non sunt? Nonne iam hi omnes anni mei, Socrate, qui adulescentiam sequuntur, mortui sunt? Nondum enim mihi ad senectutem usque veni. Quae ergo mora est, ut hos et hos alios amittam? Quid, si haec aetas absumatur, illa nobis restabit? An non videtur tibi prope idem esse habere multa pecunia, quam si quis habeat aeternitatem? Nonne idem vides omnibus aliis, qui sunt similes nobis, accidisse, ut pars eorum prius, pars post remanet? Necne tu hoc magnum malum dices me rogantem, ut ne queam aut filium aut nepotem aut praeteritorum annorum amicos et socios atque clientulos meos reliquerem? [37] Atqui nihil, Cephaele, horum miserius est: neminem scire de te, quid in vita tua bonum fuerit, quid malum; etiamsi rerum veritas quaeritur, nullum novum ex te audire. Quo enim tuo exemplo aliquis nos sequatur? Nulla vitia fugies, nulla virtutes colas. Neque enim vitia fugias, quod tamquam fures obscuris locis evadendum putabis, sed quod quoniam nascuntur in animo tamquam plantae in agro, debes eas radicitus eradicare; neque virtutes colas, quod quidquid malim vel malum vel bonum sit, certam et fixam habebas semper notitiam. Id enim vere Sophocles ait, Themistoclem magnifico sermone laudans: """"Neque oculis ullas conspicit formas, neque auditu voces, neque spiritu afficit odorem, neque menti cogitationes subducere potest."""" Tamen haec diceres me facere, si mala mea cognoscere possem. Sed quid ego istuc? Multos iam apud vos annos felicissimus vixi: noveritis me hanc rem non didicisse a meis antecessoribus, sed natum habere. [38] Nam quod ad me attinet, cur non satis fabulas fabulari audio, cuius frugiferos agros arboribus ac vitibus circumdatae tegunt opacitate luci, dum profundo solo lassata sepes agros continet opacas? Pater enim meus huic genere vitae dedit exemplum. Quippe is, cuius paternas heredes sum, ut dixi, diem noctem in conviviis militavit. Quare qui me non iuvat, idem me nescit. Aperi mihi animum. Si me in hac fortuna fefellit quispiam aut mulier aut vir, si quis me inopem esse voluit, nunc illum poenas damno deducam, nunc eum persequar, nunc eius hanc vitam supplicio poenitebit? " 2 2 "Yes, that is very true, but may I ask another question? What do youconsider to be the greatest blessing which you have reaped from yourwealth? One, he said, of which I could not expect easily to convince others.For let me tell you, Socrates, that when a man thinks himself to benear death, fears and cares enter into his mind which he never hadbefore; the tales of a world below and the punishment which is exactedthere of deeds done here were once a laughing matter to him, but nowhe is tormented with the thought that they may be true: either fromthe weakness of age, or because he is now drawing nearer to that otherplace, he has a clearer view of these things; suspicions and alarmscrowd thickly upon him, and he begins to reflect and consider whatwrongs he has done to others. And when he finds that the sum of histransgressions is great he will many a time like a child start upin his sleep for fear, and he is filled with dark forebodings. Butto him who is conscious of no sin, sweet hope, as Pindar charminglysays, is the kind nurse of his age: Hope, he says, cherishes the soul of him who lives in justice andholiness and is the nurse of his age and the companion of his journey;--hope which is mightiest to sway the restless soul of man. @@ -56,15 +56,15 @@ I should be sorry to doubt the word of such a wise and inspired man,but his mean True. Then when the person who asks me is not in his right mind I am byno means to make the return? Certainly not. When Simonides said that the repayment of a debt was justice, he didnot mean to include that case? Certainly not; for he thinks that a friend ought always to do goodto a friend and never evil." "Summary: A conversation about the blessings of wealth and the nature of justice. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Classical philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, Cephalus, Polemarchus -Time setting: Contemporary" A man cannot be a good citizen unless he has a soul of gold and silver and bronze, as well as of iron and leather and wood. He must be able to play the Zither, and to fight and to hunt; he must not only be the friend of the artisan, but, in a sort of way, of the whole animal creation: now he is a brave horse, and now a noble dog; and then again, for a time, he is both patient and gentle, as only a lion can be; now he identifies himself with the gods and is amiable, and then again he seems to be a stranger to himself, and in that change he may be said to be the rival of himself. Wherefore, as I was saying, he who wishes to be always doing what is just and holy, must be able to perform in old age all the actions of youth, if the virtue which the poet praises is to mean anything. CEPHALUS : Yes, Socrates; and I like your answer about the just. And yet I rather suspect that you have not given the whole truth. May I ask whether he who is only just, as the poet says, will be exactly like the goddess of Justice, who is a personification of justice, and will have her own character? Socrates : You mean to ask whether the just man will imitate Justice? Cephalus : Yes, I mean to say this, that the just man is active from habit or education, in a right manner, according to rule, and is able to advise, but his activity is unlike that of the god. Polemarchus : Nay, he is like him in every way; though, as I was going to say, some of his actions are far better than others. Would you not say so? Cephalus : Certainly. Polemarchus : Then we were wrong in making him a philosopher. First, he does not even think that wealth is the greatest good; and, secondly, did we not observe that when Thrasymachus was most hard pushed by you he had recourse to this notion of the advantage of the stronger; and did we not blush at having to admit such a doctrine? Will any man ever believe, especially an ordinary man, that in the world of politics and in life the advantage of the stronger is a greater good than justice? Oranges and other bulks of fruit and the fruits of the earth, and all things of the sort, will never cease to sort themselves into classes, and to remain in class or jump into another; and the cause of this, I think, is that there is a natural order of them, and origin and growth belong to certain of them, but disorder and decomposition to the rest. According to nature, that which has a better origin becomes first and is first, and that which has a worse origin becomes second and is second. +Time setting: 1950s" "A man is rich when he has all that he wants."""" Then the gods are very poor, for they want nothing,"" I said. There was a great deal of laughter at this. So then,"" said Socrates, ""if wealth and justice are different, they cannot be both good; if they were both good, the just man would be as rich as the unjust."""" And yet,"" said Cephalus, ""justice and wealth are both good."" Well, we shall have to consider that question another time,"" said Socrates. But first let us ask whether there is any other virtue beside justice and wealth, and whether we shall find some other quality which will help us to define it. Do you know any other virtue?"""" Polemarchus answered: Courage is the one I know best. It is when a man does what he believes to be his duty even though it is a dangerous thing to do."""" That's right,"" said Socrates. ""Courage is indeed a fine thing, but how is it related to justice?"""" I can't say. Perhaps justice means always telling the truth and being brave."" That's a pretty good guess, but not quite right. " 3 3 "You mean that the return of a deposit of gold which is to the injuryof the receiver, if the two parties are friends, is not the repaymentof a debt, --that is what you would imagine him to say? Yes. And are enemies also to receive what we owe to them? To be sure, he said, they are to receive what we owe them, and anenemy, as I take it, owes to an enemy that which is due or properto him --that is to say, evil. Simonides, then, after the manner of poets, would seem to have spokendarkly of the nature of justice; for he really meant to say that justiceis the giving to each man what is proper to him, and this he termeda debt. @@ -90,12 +90,12 @@ When you want a deposit to be kept safely. You mean when money is not wanted, bu That is the inference. And when you want to keep a pruning-hook safe, then justice is usefulto the individual and to the state; but when you want to use it, thenthe art of the vine-dresser? Clearly. And when you want to keep a shield or a lyre, and not to use them,you would say that justice is useful; but when you want to use them,then the art of the soldier or of the musician? Certainly. And so of all the other things; --justice is useful when they areuseless, and useless when they are useful?" "Summary: A conversation about the nature of justice and its usefulness in different situations. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Active character: Simonides, Polemarchus, Socrates" We say that this is justice, and yet we do not mean that which is expedient; but when you want to define expediency, then, as if in emulation of the Pythagoreans, you introduce the notion of justice, as a thing which is intermediate between virtue and expedience; and so, not understanding the meaning of justice, you appear to be at your wits' end, and following a will-o'-the-wisp, are pulled backwards and forwards through all matters, even concerning expedience, and make no progress, because you cannot discover what justice is. SIMONIDES: I think that we must admit that we are puzzled. POLLEMARCHUS: Certainly we are. Socrates: My dear friend, I cannot afford to give up the idea that justice is virtue and expedience at once; for if, when you are taking the waters at Aedepsus, 1 a doctor comes and says 'my good friend, if you eat or drink anything whatever before watching the sacrifices on the high-roofed temple, you will ruin your health,' would you not take care not to touch any of those things? POLLEMARCHUS: Of course. Socrates: Would not a man who had heard this from such a doctor be very likely to let the matter go, and not trouble about it? POLLEMARCHUS: Certainly not; he would not only let it go, but he would tell another that he ought to let it go too. Socrates: And suppose that he forgot the doctor's orders, and did eat or drink before the sacrifice, would he not have a fine time of it, either with his friends or with strangers? He would be laughed at and made fun of by every one, especially by the young, who can be so disagreeable. POLLEMARCHUS: He certainly would. Socrates: And yet a man may be believed to be both just and unjust, if there is anyone whom he deceives about his own injustice and makes him believe that he is just: is not that true? POLLEMARCHUS: Quite true. Socrates: And whether this belief be entertained by an individual or by a whole people (for a similar proceeding might be carried on in either case), will not that man be believed to be just and also unjust who thus deceives the individual, or the state, about his own injustice? POLLEMARCHUS: Certainly. Socrates: Then if a man has attained perfection in the art of making others believe that he is just and really not so, would you call him a just man or an unjust one? POLLEMARCHUS: An unjust man, indeed! Socrates: And if he makes them believe in this way about his injustice, should you say that he was doing them a service, or rather not? POLLEMARCHUS: Not at all. Socrates: But he might say: O my friends, how unjust are the laws of our country in making me rich, although I am just and they are not! +Active character: Simonides, Polemarchus, Socrates" "We'll have a look at your justice in the course of our conversation; but you must remember that we are not considering what is useful, but what is just. If it were useful for you to have justice, or for me or anyone else, we might be content with that. But we are trying to find out what justice is. So don't try to be clever and answer this question by saying 'It's useful.'"""" Well,"" said Polemarchus, ""that wasn't exactly my point. I had something different in mind."" What was it then?"" asked Socrates. Why,"" he said, ""I thought that justice is one of those things which is both just and useful."""" Of course it is,"" said Socrates. ""And so is medicine. That doesn't mean that being just is the same thing as being healthy, does it?"""" No,"" said Polemarchus, ""it doesn't."" Then,"" said Socrates, ""you do think that justice is something useful?"""" Certainly,"" he said. Well,"" said Socrates, ""what about being just and using it? Surely there are some people who use justice, aren't there?"""" Yes, certainly."" Do they use it like carpenters use their tools?"""" No, how could they?"" Well then, do they use it like the good doctor uses his art?"" No, not like that either."" And yet,"" said Simonides, ""we know that if people use justice they must do so in the way that each person has it in him to do it."""" That's quite true,"" said Socrates. ""But please tell us, what sort of use would a shoemaker make of justice? Would he use it for making shoes, or for cutting corn, or for baking bread?"""" It's obvious,"" said Polemarchus, ""that he'd use it for making shoes."" And what sort of use would a builder make of justice?"" Well,"" he said, ""he would use it for building houses."" And what about a statesman or a ruler? What sort of use would he make of justice?"""" He would use it for administering the State."" Don't you see,"" said Socrates, ""that we're back to where we started? Justice seems to be everywhere useful but nowhere just. It's useful in a shoemaker when he's making shoes, but not when he's cutting corn or baking bread. In a builder it's useful when he's building houses, but not when he's wearing clothes or feeding himself. And in a statesman it's useful when he's ruling, but not when he's getting on with his own private business."""" You seem to be very far from discovering what justice is,"" said Polemarchus. " 4 4 "That is the inference. Then justice is not good for much. But let us consider this furtherpoint: Is not he who can best strike a blow in a boxing match or inany kind of fighting best able to ward off a blow? Certainly. And he who is most skilful in preventing or escaping from a diseaseis best able to create one? True. And he is the best guard of a camp who is best able to steal a marchupon the enemy? @@ -123,14 +123,14 @@ The latter. Deteriorated, that is to say, in the good qualities of horses, notof Yes, of horses. And dogs are deteriorated in the good qualities of dogs, and not ofhorses? Of course. And will not men who are injured be deteriorated in that which isthe proper virtue of man?" "Summary: The text discusses the concept of justice and whether it is good to harm those who are unjust. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialogue between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical argument -Literary movement: Classical philosophy -Active character: Socrates, Polemarchus" “But does not the god, who has made them such, hold it just to punish them?” “Certainly.” “And he punishes them in a variety of ways—by diseases and disasters, as if they were unjust and unrighteous; but chiefly and expressly by the possession of evil words and opinions which he grudges them, because they use them against their friends and brethren whom he loves.” “That is quite true,” he said. “And if you like, I could add other proofs of the existence of justice far better than any which I have given.” “Do not trouble to add them,” I said, “for why do you imagine that I want proofs? If the word ‘justice’ denotes the same thing as ‘profit,’ as you say, then justice will be equally profitable and harmful to the same persons; they will be gainers, as well as losers, according to their merit, both at the hands of gods and men. And the general answer has been very satisfactorily expressed by Homer; for he lets Agamemnon say to Achilles, ‘The gods grate upon us always, when they will, at their pleasure.’ This is as much as to say, ‘It is just that when the gods are pleased with any one they prosper him; and when they are angry with him they bring him low.’” “Yes,” he replied; “that is what Homer has said, and yet he, above all others, seems to know the nature of the gods.” “And therefore he says that ‘the gods gratify the good for their own sakes, and inflict distress and toil upon the wicked.’ But let us enquire whether the gods only are just and whether we too may not strive to become like them.” “In what way, Socrates?” “I dare say you think that we are already like them, O thou stranger in Athens.” “By heaven,” I said, “no; but still I am conscious that what you hint at is not unlikely; there may be some odd chance or coincidence of letters which may imply this, though I cannot now recall this point to memory. For even in the words which you have quoted from Homer, the verse may have some meaning quite opposite to the one which you give; please to consider them again.” “I do not quite understand,” he said. “Why, do you not observe that he speaks of ‘gratifying the good for their own sake,’ and again of ‘inflicting pain upon the wicked;’ which appears to mean that the gods inflict pain upon the bad not for the sake of the bad (this would be strange indeed), but for their own sake. He adds also ‘and bestowing toil upon the wicked.’ Now all this proves that the infliction of punishment continues to be a source of pleasure to the gods, and pain to the sufferers, and that they delight in the toil of the wicked, which toils after justice and the virtuous.” “I am no longer surprised,” he said, “that you are amazed at the meanings of poets.” “What do you mean?” +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: Socrates, Polemarchus" That was the sort of justice that made for happiness. But now, he said, I see how wretchedly you talk about justice. You say that it is a good thing never to harm any one or take from him what is his? And do you imagine that this would be a good world when men would give and yield to each other and not use force at all? What would happen, my friend Polemarchus, if anyone were seeking war and moved into your country and did not yield to you, but was resolved to go on and make an assault?” “In that case,” he said, “we shall have to fight with him and kill him.” “Yes, by Zeus, we shall! But then surely, if there are to be recompenses, we shall also have to pay him, since he came here intending to do us harm, and therefore, if he gets away without punishment, he will still be our enemy, and so he will come again and make war upon us. In that case, even though we may beat him in battle and kill him, we shall have to pay him damages; and if we don’t, we shall be unjust in not doing so, and also suffer further harm. Now tell me, if we must punish those who injure us, whether it is better for them to injure us or not to injure us?” “Certainly it is better not to injure us.” “Then it is better to abstain from injuring others than to injure them?” “Of course it is!” “But if they are going to injure us, it is better that we should injure them first?” “Most certainly!” “And therefore we must be prepared to punish them, as well as to injure them, if they try to injure us?” “Yes, we must.” “And we must also be prepared to use force against those who are going to use force against us?” “Yes, indeed!” “Therefore,” I said, “justice means using force against those who are going to use force against us, and harming those who are going to harm us.” He assented. “And surely, too,” I said, “justice means taking from those who have more than they need and giving to those who have less than they need.” “Certainly,” he said; “that is fair enough.” “Then,” I said, “if injustice means taking from people what belongs to them, and justice means giving to people what belongs to them, and taking from them what does not belong to them, and keeping what does belong to them, it follows that justice is good and injustice bad.” He agreed. “And we say that justice is equality, and injustice inequality?” “Yes.” “Then justice is good because it makes people equal, and injustice is bad because it makes them unequal?” “Yes.” “But you and I, Polemarchus, are clearly not equally strong.” “True.” 5 5 "Certainly. And that human virtue is justice? To be sure. Then men who are injured are of necessity made unjust? That is the result. But can the musician by his art make men unmusical? Certainly not. Or the horseman by his art make them bad horsemen? Impossible. And can the just by justice make men unjust, or speaking general canthe good by virtue make them bad? Assuredly not. Any more than heat can produce cold? It cannot. Or drought moisture? Clearly not. Nor can the good harm any one? Impossible. And the just is the good? Certainly. Then to injure a friend or any one else is not the act of a just man,but of the opposite, who is the unjust? I think that what you say is quite true, Socrates. Then if a man says that justice consists in the repayment of debts,and that good is the debt which a man owes to his friends, and evilthe debt which he owes to his enemies, --to say this is not wise;for it is not true, if, as has been clearly shown, the injuring ofanother can be in no case just. @@ -144,16 +144,16 @@ I was panic-stricken at his words, and could not look at him withouttrembling. I Thrasymachus, I said, with a quiver, don't be hard upon us. Polemarchusand I may have been guilty of a little mistake in the argument, butI can assure you that the error was not intentional. If we were seekingfor a piece of gold, you would not imagine that we were 'knockingunder to one another,' and so losing our chance of finding it. Andwhy, when we are seeking for justice, a thing more precious than manypieces of gold, do you say that we are weakly yielding to one anotherand not doing our utmost to get at the truth? Nay, my good friend,we are most willing and anxious to do so, but the fact is that wecannot. And if so, you people who know all things should pity us andnot be angry with us. How characteristic of Socrates! he replied, with a bitter laugh; --that'syour ironical style! Did I not foresee --have I not already told you,that whatever he was asked he would refuse to answer, and try ironyor any other shuffle, in order that he might avoid answering?" "Summary: The text discusses the concept of justice and whether it is possible for the just to harm others. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Plato's philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, Polemarchus, Thrasymachus -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" 'Well, Socrates, and is there any other reason to be given why justice has not the nature which you ascribe to it?' 'I fancy,' said I, 'that I hardly know what you mean; it sounds fine, but I do not quite understand.' Whereupon he smiled and replied, 'Why, I will try to make you understand; and if you follow what I am going to say, I believe that you yourself will prove to be the best interpreter of my meaning.' 'Do you think that I shall improve?' said I. 'Yes,' he said, 'I think that you will.' 'Then,' said I, 'make haste and explain, for I must be off soon, and then we will have more leisure when we meet.' 'Do you see this house of mine here?' he said; 'I should like to know whether I could ever bring myself to believe that I would rather have the possession of it, and of all things of the same nature, than of your house and all others of that sort?' 'No,' said I; 'how can you ask me whether I imagine that there is anybody who would rather have his own house thrown down than another person's?' 'And you think that if I were to offer a man his choice of having this house or yours:—' 'He would choose his own surely.' 'But if I were to put a further alternative, that he might have either his own house or yours together with all the other houses in the world?' 'He would still choose his own house and yours as well, and the other houses would not count.' 'And so, my friend, if he were to possess them all he would not wish to give up his own or yours in exchange for them all?' 'Why should he, Thrasymachus?' 'And suppose that the other houses were better built than either of these?' 'Still he would not—?' 'No, he would not,' said Polemarchus. 'Speak and answer the question which I ask, and do not suggest other questions which are irrelevant to my argument.' 'By all means,' he said; 'and please to ask whatever you wish.' 'Bear in mind then, Thrasymachus, that you are stating what is the general opinion of the world, and saying that from a lying sense of honour, men who do not consult their own interests choose rather to please other people, and honour and applaud one another. Is not that your meaning?' 'That is my meaning.' 'Then I reply that if honour abode really in such actions they would not be pleasures which are bought by money, but would be honoured and applauded for their own sake; they would be rewarded even by those who know them only through report, even when they have never benefited them, and even if they have been acted for their hurt. The fact is that Olympic victors and Olympic athletes are honored and praised and receive rewards which are theirs wholly without merit, and yet they are the objects of much envy. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" I will tell you what justice is, and you shall tell me whether I am right or not. Justice is giving to each man his due; do you agree? Polemarchus: Certainly. Socrates: And giving to each what is due is giving to the superior what is superior and to the inferior what is inferior. It is giving honour to he who deserves honour, wealth to the rich, and office to the ruler. Polemarchus: Most certainly. Socrates: Then we are agreed that justice is giving to each man his due. Polemarchus: So it seems. Socrates: But if a man acquires wealth unjustly, must he not be deprived of it by him who is injured? Polemarchus: Certainly. Socrates: And he who has been robbed by another of something which belongs to him, should take back what is his own again, if he can; but if he cannot, he should be avenged on the offender, and take vengeance on him, even though this means death himself. Polemarchus: That is true. Socrates: And justice, as we were saying, is the giving to each man his due? Polemarchus: Undoubtedly. Socrates: And the due of a slave is obedience? Polemarchus: True. Socrates: Then he who is the best at obeying is nearest to being just? Polemarchus: Very true. Socrates: And the worst at obeying is in a manner furthest from being just? Polemarchus: Quite so. Socrates: Then the just man is the servant and the enemy of the unjust? Polemarchus: I dare say. Socrates: He will also be the subject of the unjust, if he cannot be his master? Polemarchus: Clearly. Socrates: Then justice is the interest of the stronger? Polemarchus: What do you mean? Socrates: I mean to say that the just is made last of all creatures, although justice is the ornament of the soul, and the unjust the bane of it, never leaving it either alone or undisturbed? Polemarchus: In my opinion you are right. Socrates: And now having determined upon this, let us determine upon the nature of injustice, for surely this will be no light addition to our former result. Polemarchus: By all means. Socrates: After what manner then is a man an unjust man who partakes of injustice and lives a life of injustice? Tell me, and I will answer. Polemarchus: Why, he who does not give to each what is his due, Socrates. Socrates: Nay, answer me. Does not injustice consist in taking from a person what is his own and making over to him what is not his own? Polemarchus: To be sure. Socrates: Thrasymachus said just now that justice was the interest of the stronger and of none else, and that the unjust god of whom we spoke would despotically use his godhead for the benefit of his subjects. 6 6 "You are a philosopher, Thrasymachus, I replied, and well know thatif you ask a person what numbers make up twelve, taking care to prohibithim whom you ask from answering twice six, or three times four, orsix times two, or four times three, 'for this sort of nonsense willnot do for me,' --then obviously, that is your way of putting thequestion, no one can answer you. But suppose that he were to retort,'Thrasymachus, what do you mean? If one of these numbers which youinterdict be the true answer to the question, am I falsely to saysome other number which is not the right one? --is that your meaning?'-How would you answer him? Just as if the two cases were at all alike! he said. Why should they not be? I replied; and even if they are not, but onlyappear to be so to the person who is asked, ought he not to say whathe thinks, whether you and I forbid him or not? I presume then that you are going to make one of the interdicted answers? @@ -172,12 +172,12 @@ Let me first understand you, I replied. justice, as you say, is theinterest of t That's abominable of you, Socrates; you take the words in the sensewhich is most damaging to the argument. Not at all, my good sir, I said; I am trying to understand them; andI wish that you would be a little clearer. Well, he said, have you never heard that forms of government differ;there are tyrannies, and there are democracies, and there are aristocracies?" "Summary: The speaker is having a conversation with Thrasymachus about justice and the interest of the stronger. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled -Speech standard: Informal, raw +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation Active character: Socrates, Thrasymachus -Quoted character: Glaucon" "He was right; the thing never came out as he would have liked. He tried his best, but it wouldn't come out. It wasn't in him, and I believe he knew it before we began. 'Well,' said he, 'perhaps I am not like Glaucon.' 'Then you must be like Adeimantus,' said I. 'Speak then.' 'O my friends,' he cried, 'what strange things I said when I meant something else!' 'What do you mean?' said I. 'Why, now,' said he, 'do you imagine that the just man is better equipped than any other to deal with affairs of state? Do you think the just man a friend of the wise and good?' 'Yes,' said I, 'I certainly should.' 'And suppose the poor unjust man were to fall into some misfortune, would he not be the last person to whom his neighbours would give help and assistance?' 'Why yes, I think they would.' 'Then the just man is thought to be of another tribe from the just?' 'Perhaps so.' 'Is there any merit, then, in doing what every one else is doing?' 'Certainly not.' 'Surely not, Socrates,' said Polemarchus; 'but why should a man who is really good at anything be thought by men who are good for nothing to belong to another tribe?' 'That is a question which I cannot answer,' said I; 'but I am sure that he who does what he ought, and is always at his proper business, is the man whom the world calls just.' 'And this is he who goes the way which all dictate, whether they be rulers or subjects?'' Certainly.' 'Accordingly the just man will be the servant of the laws, if he means to be a rascal?"""" If,"" said I; ""but there is another sort of man, Thrasymachus, who also is the servant of the laws."" Who?"" said he. ""The good man, I said."" The good man, then, is also the servant of the laws?"" Yes, he."" The third sort who are the servants of the laws,"""" said he, """"are those whom we were just now calling useless, and who are truly slaves, and have no place among good men."" Exactly."" Suppose we distinguish them,"" he said; """"and say that those who are servants of the laws in the best sense, and of course the other senses too, are the wise, and that the foolish are the slaves.'"" Again,"" said I, ""you are speaking of the man who is a good servant of the law."" Exactly."" And who, I said, is he who uses the laws as a servant and not a master, but meets the laws and takes off his shoes and socks as we do when we enter a house, and walks along in them, and finds the road very rough and stony, and not having been used to such treatment says at last, the path of man is a thorny one, and I cannot go my way without the aid of the tools which my father gave me, and which are useful on the smooth road of politics, where I find myself; let me put on my shoes and stockings again, for the wear and tear of this journey is damage to them, may I not?"" " +Quoted character: Glaucon" He began at last in this way: “And now, Socrates,” he said, “perhaps you would like to hear what I mean; my meaning shall be briefly told. Suppose that a man and I were disputing, and I was asked by one of us, ‘Why do you say just that?’ and I replied, ‘Because I say so,’ or, ‘Because I like it,’ or again, ‘Because it is according to my judgment’; if the person who asks me these questions is ridiculous, I should answer him in a ridiculous spirit, and say in reply, ‘I say so because I like it, and because I am of opinion that it is just.’ If he is not ridiculous, but earnest in his inquiry, and really desires to know what I mean, I should try to persuade him that whatever is desired by the rulers of the State, and liked by them, this is just, and no other thing whatsoever.” “And when he hears that,” said Glaucon, “he will be perfectly satisfied.” “Not so,” replied Thrasymachus; “but if you suppose that when he has heard this he will still ask ‘What is sought by the rulers?’ and when you tell him that they seek their own advantage, he will enquire what is meant by advantage, and if you again answer that it means pleasure, he will further ask whether you bid him take every sort of pleasure, or only the pleasures of eating and drinking and the like? and if he be gluttonous he will say that he ought to take every sort of pleasure, and will quote Homer as an authority, ‘who bade men fill every pleasure to the brim.’ And then what will you say?” “You had better ask me,” said I, “whether I agree with Homer and the glutton, or Thrasymachus.” “No, my friend,” he said, “the question is not asked in the right form. The question is not whether you agree with them, but whether the rulers are to be supposed to get pleasure out of what is advantageous to themselves, for example, out of eating and drinking; or out of taking bribes, and doing things which kings and princes are commonly in the habit of doing. For in all these actions we shall find that they are pursuing, not the advantage of their subjects, but of themselves.” “Then I think,” I said, “that Thrasymachus is in the right, and that the rulers, in their dealings with their subjects, are not looking to the interests of the State, but to their own.” “Excellent!” he replied. “You quickly make admission against yourself. Now let me propose another question: Is not he who has the power of the State a ruler though he may be bad?” “Certainly.” “And does not the same hold of him who commits any wrong, or does any injury?—is not he who commits any wrong an aggressor?” “Absolutely.” “And if he who commits injustice against individuals is called by the name of a thief, wherefore should we hesitate any longer to give the name of thief to him who steals the whole city? Do you not see that when the makers of laws have framed noble words expressing fine sentiments about justice, people are actually afraid that while they use the language of the law they may be stealing individual victims; whereas the thief is just the man who uses the fine sentiments of justice about matters in which the law has nothing to say, and who is therefore, as we saw already, worthiest of double wages? 7 7 "Yes, I know. And the government is the ruling power in each state? Certainly. And the different forms of government make laws democratical, aristocratical,tyrannical, with a view to their several interests; and these laws,which are made by them for their own interests, are the justice whichthey deliver to their subjects, and him who transgresses them theypunish as a breaker of the law, and unjust. And that is what I meanwhen I say that in all states there is the same principle of justice,which is the interest of the government; and as the government mustbe supposed to have power, the only reasonable conclusion is, thateverywhere there is one principle of justice, which is the interestof the stronger. Now I understand you, I said; and whether you are right or not I willtry to discover. But let me remark, that in defining justice you haveyourself used the word 'interest' which you forbade me to use. Itis true, however, that in your definition the words 'of the stronger'are added. A small addition, you must allow, he said. Great or small, never mind about that: we must first enquire whetherwhat you are saying is the truth. Now we are both agreed that justiceis interest of some sort, but you go on to say 'of the stronger';about this addition I am not so sure, and must therefore considerfurther. @@ -200,13 +200,13 @@ Those were not his words, rejoined Polemarchus. Socrates - THRASYMACHUS Never mind, I replied, if he now says that they are, let us accepthis statement. Tell me, Thrasymachus, I said, did you mean by justicewhat the stronger thought to be his interest, whether really so ornot? Certainly not, he said. Do you suppose that I call him who is mistakenthe stronger at the time when he is mistaken?" "Summary: The text discusses the concept of justice and whether it is in the interest of the stronger or not. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation Active character: Socrates, Cleitophon, Polemarchus, Thrasymachus -Diegetic time: A few minutes" Socrates. It is hard to know what to say, for justice is a good which all men praise and in which they all claim to share; but when we ask them what it is they cannot tell. Cleitophon. Perhaps not, Socrates; but if you ask those who are virtuous, they will say that justice is doing what they bid us. Polemarchus. I like the way in which he puts that,” said Thrasymachus; “you have nicely hit upon the truth. What they call justice in a State, Cleitophon, is, as I maintain, nothing else than the private interest of the rulers.” Socrates. And do they not say the same of me here? Do I not always desire the good of my own city according to my ability? Thrasymachus. Yes, indeed, Socrates, how could you help doing that, either in your city or in mine? But I should like to hear what justice and injustice are, in relation to themselves, in the State. Socrates. There is no difficulty in seeing this, Thrasymachus, if we are only able to prove the point, that what is for the advantage of each individual is also, under similar circumstances, for the advantage of the State. Thrasymachus. Very good, Socrates; now try to prove this. Socrates. Is the advantage of the weaker class the same as that of the stronger, in respect to honour and payment? Thrasymachus. No, certainly not. Socrates. Suppose that I am the weaker and you the stronger, and that the question is whether I am to take anything from you and you are to guard against my taking more and more: shall I be most likely to get my way if I contend with you myself, or if I employ another to contest your claims and get away with my property? Thrasymachus. The latter, of course. Socrates. And who is likely to be the ablest defender of me? Thrasymachus. He who knows when not to defend me. Socrates. And he who knows when to defend me is he who knows best when I ought to be defended? Thrasymachus. Certainly. Socrates. And this is likely to be one who knows my interests best, for he will most benefit me when he makes the most exact calculation of when I should and when I should not fight for them. Thrasymachus. Yes, he will. Socrates. And who knows my interests better than myself? Is there another who will be equally desirous of my interests? Thrasymachus. Certainly not. Socrates. But is not he likely to be most able to defend me who has great power and is the friend of the governed as well as of the governing? Thrasymachus. He will. Socrates. Who is likely to be his friend and have him at his beck and call, he who is only in a very limited degree dependent on him, or he who has no sort of necessity to obey him? Thrasymachus. Clearly he who has no such necessity. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" Vastu valistaa ja luulee, ett siihen ei mitn yhteytt ole ollut. Mutta joka sitten nyt kuuleekin sen, niin se on niin kummallinen ja ksitys niin vieraanomaisen hirvittvn, ettei sit voi puhua ilman kauhua, vaikka olisikin asetettu esille; sill se on niin vastenmielinen kaikkia ihmisjoukkoa, ettei sit voi kuulla kovinkaan pitkn aikaan eik siit pysty nauttimaan: mutta minulla on viel suurempi epilys siit, kuka sen sanoi, kun minulle tuntuu silt, ett se on joku jotakuinkin samanlaisenlainen kuin Aristofaneen tekstit. Niinp sanoo Sosias. Ja mink Sosias? Sanoo Thrasymakhos, ettei oikeudenmukaisuus ole hyv, vaan edun saajalle sopiva. Eihn se muuten oikein ratkaisevassa asiassa voisi olla. Jos oikeudenmukaisuus ei olisi hyv, eik edun saajalle sopiva, niin miksi meidt tmn nyt pitvt sen haastattelun? Jos hn taasen oli oikein, niin miksi me sitten kohtelemme hnt nm lailla? Vaan katsokaa, thden, ettek teko samaa virhett kuin ne, joista hnen puhuu, vaan etsitte heidn edunsaajansa ja korjaatte heidt, jos ovat vahingon tai virheen alaisina. Koska silloin lienee parempaa, ett toimivat oikeudenmukaisesti kuin epoikeudenmukaisesti, eik teille sitten myskin hyv, jos pannaan oikeudenmukaisuutta omien etujenne puolesta arvioitavaksi. Kaikki sanat kuului osuvasti. Klikhos kuitenkin huusi: Noh, nyt menk hyvsti! Niin koko joukko alkoi maata kuin tahti. Polemarchos lksikin heti ulos. Socrates istuutui paikallaan ja sanoi: Hn on tehnyt asian niin, kuin kreikkalainen mies tekee, kun on nyrpistynyt, eik enempaeaikaan kest. Thrasymakhos kuitenkin jatkoi: Min tiesin, ett he eivt saa sit, mit he ajattelevat, koska heill on viel kaikenlaisia erehdyksi: ja kun he juuri eivt tied, millainen oikeudenmukaisuus on, eivt hek minun sanojani ymmrr, vaikka min olen niit selittnyt niin tarkoin kuin mahdollista. Silloin Cleitophon sanoi: Vai oletko sin siis valmis jatkamaan sanojasi? Thrasymakhos: Kyllhn min tietisin, jos he tajusivat kytt pns, mutta nyt en kyll. Cleitophon: No, niin anna sitten minulle ottaa siit ktkeytn. Thrasymakhos: Totta, min annan. Cleitophon: Minklaista oikeudenmukaisuus on? Thrasymakhos: Sen, jonka itselleni uskon, ett se on hyv, eik mitn muuta. Cleitophon: Miksi minusta silloin ei ole oikein, jos minua pidttemme vain oikeudenmukaisena, kun min minua itse pelastaan? Thrasymakhos: Te ette tee sit, vaan tahdotte sanoa, ett te ette tee sit. Miksi kaikki ihmiset eivt ole ihan samanlaisia? 8 8 "Yes, I said, my impression was that you did so, when you admittedthat the ruler was not infallible but might be sometimes mistaken. You argue like an informer, Socrates. Do you mean, for example, thathe who is mistaken about the sick is a physician in that he is mistaken?or that he who errs in arithmetic or grammar is an arithmetician orgrammarian at the me when he is making the mistake, in respect ofthe mistake? True, we say that the physician or arithmetician or grammarianhas made a mistake, but this is only a way of speaking; for the factis that neither the grammarian nor any other person of skill evermakes a mistake in so far as he is what his name implies; they noneof them err unless their skill fails them, and then they cease tobe skilled artists. No artist or sage or ruler errs at the time whenhe is what his name implies; though he is commonly said to err, andI adopted the common mode of speaking. But to be perfectly accurate,since you are such a lover of accuracy, we should say that the ruler,in so far as he is the ruler, is unerring, and, being unerring, alwayscommands that which is for his own interest; and the subject is requiredto execute his commands; and therefore, as I said at first and nowrepeat, justice is the interest of the stronger. Indeed, Thrasymachus, and do I really appear to you to argue likean informer? @@ -221,13 +221,13 @@ A healer of the sick, he replied. And the pilot --that is to say, the true pilot A captain of sailors. The circumstance that he sails in the ship is not to be taken intoaccount; neither is he to be called a sailor; the name pilot by whichhe is distinguished has nothing to do with sailing, but is significantof his skill and of his authority over the sailors. Very true, he said. Now, I said, every art has an interest? Certainly. For which the art has to consider and provide? Yes, that is the aim of art. And the interest of any art is the perfection of it --this and nothingelse? What do you mean? I mean what I may illustrate negatively by the example of the body.Suppose you were to ask me whether the body is self-sufficing or haswants, I should reply: Certainly the body has wants; for the bodymay be ill and require to be cured, and has therefore interests towhich the art of medicine ministers; and this is the origin and intentionof medicine, as you will acknowledge. Am I not right?" "Summary: The speaker is having a conversation with Thrasymachus about rulers and their mistakes. -Enunciation: First-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Active character: Socrates, Thrasymachus" "But don't say that again, I beg you. If you do, I shall be afraid that the Sun himself is going to be caught out in his error."""" Thrasymachus had been listening to this with a sardonic grin on his face; but he now spoke up and said: """"Come on, Socrates! You know perfectly well that rulers are human beings just like the rest of us, and they make mistakes just as we all do."""" Well,"" I replied, ""I thought that was exactly what I had been saying all along, though you may not have noticed it. But if you think I am wrong, tell me this: Are there any men who are so good at their job that they never make mistakes?"""" No,"" he said, ""there are none."" Then,"" I said, ""you admit that there are mistakes made by those who govern?"""" Of course."" And you also admit that there are things which, when done rightly, constitute justice?"""" Yes, certainly."" Very well, then,"" I said. ""So it is clear that some people do right and some do wrong in respect of the same things, and that this constitutes injustice, which is another name for being unrighteous. Is that not so?"""" It does seem so,"" he said. Well then,"" I went on, ""the opposite of doing wrong is doing right, and the opposite of being unrighteous is being righteous. Therefore, if someone is righteous and another is unrighteous, one will necessarily be doing right and the other wrong. So, according to your previous admission, if both are in positions of authority, one will be governing rightly and the other wrongly. Is that not so?"""" It certainly is,"" he said. " +Active character: Socrates, Thrasymachus" But if you can’t manage a subject of your own, why don’t you take it up with someone else? Then you’ll be free to do as you like and I won’t have any more of this nonsense.’ ‘I agree with you there,’ said Thrasymachus. ‘I’m ready to admit that we are both equally at fault.’ ‘Then let’s make a start,’ said Socrates. ‘You were going to tell me about the mistakes which rulers make in their dealings with each other. Which do you think is the first mistake they make?’ ‘The first mistake,’ said Thrasymachus, ‘is when they give their subjects the right to hold office by election and to rule over them.’ ‘What a piece of luck,’ said Socrates. ‘There was no need for us to quarrel over this question of equality and inequality. We shall have plenty of other things to quarrel about. The fact is that most people are too good for their jobs and I suppose that’s why they go in for politics. But what sort of people do you think should be rulers?’ ‘Rulers,’ said Thrasymachus, ‘should be naturally superior beings. They should also be born rulers, just as weasels are born to catch mice, or slaves are born to serve their master.’ ‘Quite right!’ said Socrates. ‘And what kind of person would you say a naturally superior being was?’ ‘The kind who always gets his own way and makes others obey him. If you want an example of one of these, look at yourself. You are a naturally superior being and I am your slave.’ ‘Oh dear, what a terrible position I’m in! There’s nothing I can say to that except that I’m not really a naturally superior being.’ ‘I’m sure you aren’t,’ said Thrasymachus. ‘You’re a fool, that’s all you are. And you’re a fool because you’ve never had anyone to teach you the art of ruling. That’s why you don’t know how to get your own way. Now I’m not a fool and I do know how to get my own way and I always do. So, according to your definition, I must be a naturally superior being. Well then, are you going to try and prove that you’re a naturally superior being after all, or will you admit that you are inferior to me?’ ‘My dear fellow,’ said Socrates, ‘this is becoming very serious. Are you seriously suggesting that I am a naturally inferior being?’ ‘Yes, I am.’ ‘And that you are a naturally superior being?’ ‘Of course I am.’ ‘And that you are always able to get your own way?’ ‘Certainly I am.’ ‘And that you are teaching me something which I have no knowledge of?’ ‘That’s exactly what I am doing.’ ‘Well then, why don’t you beat me at it? Go on, try beating me at it. 9 9 "Quite right, he replied. But is the art of medicine or any other art faulty or deficient inany quality in the same way that the eye may be deficient in sightor the ear fail of hearing, and therefore requires another art toprovide for the interests of seeing and hearing --has art in itself,I say, any similar liability to fault or defect, and does every artrequire another supplementary art to provide for its interests, andthat another and another without end? Or have the arts to look onlyafter their own interests? Or have they no need either of themselvesor of another? --having no faults or defects, they have no need tocorrect them, either by the exercise of their own art or of any other;they have only to consider the interest of their subject-matter. Forevery art remains pure and faultless while remaining true --that isto say, while perfect and unimpaired. Take the words in your precisesense, and tell me whether I am not right."" Yes, clearly. Then medicine does not consider the interest of medicine, but theinterest of the body? True, he said. Nor does the art of horsemanship consider the interests of the artof horsemanship, but the interests of the horse; neither do any otherarts care for themselves, for they have no needs; they care only forthat which is the subject of their art? @@ -241,28 +241,28 @@ He gave a reluctant 'Yes.' Then, I said, Thrasymachus, there is no one in any ru When we had got to this point in the argument, and every one saw thatthe definition of justice had been completely upset, Thrasymachus,instead of replying to me, said: Tell me, Socrates, have you got anurse? Why do you ask such a question, I said, when you ought rather to beanswering? Because she leaves you to snivel, and never wipes your nose: she hasnot even taught you to know the shepherd from the sheep." "Summary: The text discusses the nature of art and its relationship to its subject matter. -Enunciation: Socrates and Thrasymachus -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical dialogue -Active character: Socrates, Thrasymachus" "Well, now, there's art in making a man like me, too. And there's art in all those things, and yet you don't say they're the same art."""" Oh, no,"" said Socrates; ""they're very different kinds of art. But they all have to do with something that's good; because the art is for the sake of the thing that's good. You see, what's good doesn't need any art."""" No, I don't see it."" Of course you don't; how could you?"""" Thrasymachus sneered, but he seemed to be in a better humor than he had been before; and when Socrates went on: """"But art is for the sake of the thing that's good. You can make anything that's bad by art, but nothing that's good. It isn't medicine that's good, but health; it's not surgery that's good, but cutting out the bad part of you, if you've got an abscess or something like that."""" So it's not making speeches that's good, but justice."" I don't believe that,"" said Thrasymachus; ""I'm sure I know a great many speeches that are good enough to hang themselves with."""" Well, yes, you may; but as a rule I suppose speeches are made for other people, aren't they?"""" To hang them with?"" Yes."" Then won't the speaker want his speech to be good for somebody else?"" That depends."" Depends on what?"" On the kind of speech. If you wanted to make a funeral speech, you'd want to make it as bad as you could, wouldn't you?"""" Yes, that would be about right for a funeral."" I suppose so,"" said Socrates. ""But let's take some other kind of speech. Suppose you wanted to deceive somebody."""" Deceive him? I should think a sensible man would rather please him than deceive him."""" Quite so; but let's say you wanted to deceive him."""" Why shouldn't you want to please him?"" Well, because then you might be found out, and then you'd be punished."" In the first place, you mightn't be found out at all."" Mightn't I?"" No; if you were careful and clever you could keep it from anybody finding out that you'd deceived him."""" In that case why deceive him?"" How do I know? There are plenty of reasons. Suppose you wanted to get money out of him, or something else that you wanted badly enough to be willing to risk getting found out for. Or suppose you were just an evil-minded scamp who liked to deceive people for the fun of it."""" Well, I don't see why you should want to do that, either. But let's suppose you did."""" All right; we'll suppose it; only it seems to me you might as well kill yourself outright instead of fooling around with a deception like that. Why, you might even murder a man for the fun of it. " +Active character: Socrates, Thrasymachus" "Well, did you not say that the artist should be a lover of his subject?"""" But surely he must love it for its own sake?"" said Socrates. """"What is the use of loving anything for the sake of something else?"" And what would you say if I were to tell you that the artist loves beauty, and so takes delight in his work as being beautiful, but that he does not love beauty for its own sake?"" Impossible,"" said Thrasymachus; ""surely he must love it for its own sake."" He must love it for its own sake, then, if at all?"" Yes, certainly."" And do you think that any man who values pleasure above everything, and thinks the good man the blessed man, can possibly be an artist?"" No, certainly not."" Then if there is such an animal as an artistic nature, it is only where there are also other things which it values as highly as beauty?"" Of course."" Then the artist will not value beauty absolutely, but only relatively to other things, whatever they may be."" Certainly not."" And these are always different? Yes, different with everyone."" Very good. Now consider this question: Suppose that Homer had been brought up among us Spartans, what sort of a poet do you think that he would have been?"" The worst possible piper out of all Greece."" Why?"" Because he would have had no feeling for our character, which is as unlike the Hellenic character as can be."""" Then again, suppose some Spartan youth of today had been brought up by the swine-herd Eumaeus, what sort of a man do you think that he would have been?"" The most worthless of men."""" Why?"" Because he would have lost all sense of shame about hard work and eating and drinking, and would have felt at home among slaves or paupers."" Then let me ask what is the difference between the two cases? One was a Hellene who was brought up among us, and the other was one of us who was brought up among Hellenes; yet you affirm that the first would have been a better poet and the second a worse man."" That is what often happens, Socrates."" " 10 10 "What makes you say that? I replied. Because you fancy that the shepherd or neatherd fattens of tends thesheep or oxen with a view to their own good and not to the good ofhimself or his master; and you further imagine that the rulers ofstates, if they are true rulers, never think of their subjects assheep, and that they are not studying their own advantage day andnight. Oh, no; and so entirely astray are you in your ideas aboutthe just and unjust as not even to know that justice and the justare in reality another's good; that is to say, the interest of theruler and stronger, and the loss of the subject and servant; and injusticethe opposite; for the unjust is lord over the truly simple and just:he is the stronger, and his subjects do what is for his interest,and minister to his happiness, which is very far from being theirown. Consider further, most foolish Socrates, that the just is alwaysa loser in comparison with the unjust. First of all, in private contracts:wherever the unjust is the partner of the just you will find that,when the partnership is dissolved, the unjust man has always moreand the just less. Secondly, in their dealings with the State: whenthere is an income tax, the just man will pay more and the unjustless on the same amount of income; and when there is anything to bereceived the one gains nothing and the other much. Observe also whathappens when they take an office; there is the just man neglectinghis affairs and perhaps suffering other losses, and getting nothingout of the public, because he is just; moreover he is hated by hisfriends and acquaintance for refusing to serve them in unlawful ways.But all this is reversed in the case of the unjust man. I am speaking,as before, of injustice on a large scale in which the advantage ofthe unjust is more apparent; and my meaning will be most clearly seenif we turn to that highest form of injustice in which the criminalis the happiest of men, and the sufferers or those who refuse to doinjustice are the most miserable --that is to say tyranny, which byfraud and force takes away the property of others, not little by littlebut wholesale; comprehending in one, things sacred as well as profane,private and public; for which acts of wrong, if he were detected perpetratingany one of them singly, he would be punished and incur great disgrace--they who do such wrong in particular cases are called robbers oftemples, and man-stealers and burglars and swindlers and thieves.But when a man besides taking away the money of the citizens has madeslaves of them, then, instead of these names of reproach, he is termedhappy and blessed, not only by the citizens but by all who hear ofhis having achieved the consummation of injustice. For mankind censureinjustice, fearing that they may be the victims of it and not becausethey shrink from committing it. And thus, as I have shown, Socrates,injustice, when on a sufficient scale, has more strength and freedomand mastery than justice; and, as I said at first, justice is theinterest of the stronger, whereas injustice is a man's own profitand interest. Thrasymachus, when he had thus spoken, having, like a bathman, delugedour ears with his words, had a mind to go away. But the company wouldnot let him; they insisted that he should remain and defend his position;and I myself added my own humble request that he would not leave us.Thrasymachus, I said to him, excellent man, how suggestive are yourremarks! And are you going to run away before you have fairly taughtor learned whether they are true or not? Is the attempt to determinethe way of man's life so small a matter in your eyes --to determinehow life may be passed by each one of us to the greatest advantage? And do I differ from you, he said, as to the importance of the enquiry? You appear rather, I replied, to have no care or thought about us,Thrasymachus --whether we live better or worse from not knowing whatyou say you know, is to you a matter of indifference. Prithee, friend,do not keep your knowledge to yourself; we are a large party; andany benefit which you confer upon us will be amply rewarded. For myown part I openly declare that I am not convinced, and that I do notbelieve injustice to be more gainful than justice, even if uncontrolledand allowed to have free play. For, granting that there may be anunjust man who is able to commit injustice either by fraud or force,still this does not convince me of the superior advantage of injustice,and there may be others who are in the same predicament with myself.Perhaps we may be wrong; if so, you in your wisdom should convinceus that we are mistaken in preferring justice to injustice. And how am I to convince you, he said, if you are not already convincedby what I have just said; what more can I do for you? Would you haveme put the proof bodily into your souls?" "Summary: The speaker expresses their belief that rulers and the powerful benefit from injustice while the weak suffer, leading to a conversation about the nature of justice and injustice. Narrative arc: Philosophical debate -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Enlightenment +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The speaker, Thrasymachus -Time setting: Contemporary" He had a way of expressing himself which, though I did not always understand it, made an indescribable impression on me. He spoke rather like a surgeon than any other person; if you know what sort of a man a surgeon is in his own house with his friends. Quite of course he began by asking: ‘What do you mean, Glaucon, by giving this definition of justice? ’ And then he added, ‘You do not mean that the just man is one who is justice itself; for there would be no need of making just men, if so.’ No; I said, ‘I only mean to say that the just man is just and the unjust man unjust.’ ‘Yes,’ he replied, ‘but I still think that justice is better than injustice.’ ‘And therefore,’ I said, ‘having justice, he will be, as man and citizen, happier and more successful than the unjust man.’ ‘Far more happy, as we were saying before.’ 8 And having happiness, he will also have the greatest power with his fellow-men, both in warlike and in political actions; he will be a meet partner for rule, and when in office will be most highly esteemed.’ ‘Undoubtedly.’ ‘While the injustice which is desired by injustice, and not in so far as injustice, but because injustice, always makes men worse, and less able to profit either themselves or their friends; this is true, I think, of all injustice, whether small or great, although some forms of injustice are better and less evil than others.’ ‘Of course.’ ‘And yet the just man who is thought unjust will suffer these evils from the injustice of others, he being really neither unjust nor ignorant, but pregnant with virtue;—is not that, after all, the greatest of evils, and can you conceive any greater?’ When I heard his words, Thrasymachus, who had been making a desperate struggle to restrain himself, was filled with rage and began to curse and to shout. So I turned to him and said: ‘Why, Thrasymachus, what is the matter, and why are you angry? I certainly did not mean to upset you, and yet perhaps I was talking rather big. If I hurt your feelings I quite apologise, and will try to tell you just what I mean. As my first step toward this I feel that I must pay more attention to the distinction which you drew at the beginning between justice and wisdom. The wise and thoughtful will not mind telling us how they regard the two, whether they are not the same or different, and whether the just man is the wise or the unwise man. Please to communicate your wisdom to us.’ ‘O dear me! Do you mean to be funny, Socrates?’ said he. ‘Or do you really imagine that you are saying something witty when you ask me questions to which I am ready to reply that I have told you already the whole truth about them, and yet you are not content until I have repeated the same thing over and over again? +Time setting: 1950s" He had said before that the weak suffered and the strong did what they liked with the weak, and now he showed why. He said just what I had felt in my heart of hearts. ‘I believe,’ he said, ‘that all men whenever they get a chance take care of number one and let the rest of the world look after itself.’ ‘And so do the gods,’ I said; ‘they never interfere with human affairs more than they can help. Don’t you think that they would interfere if it were not for this privilege which you claim for justice? Surely there is no greater evil to human life than injustice, and the gods themselves could hardly like such a thing.’ ‘Why?’ he asked. ‘Why should they? It is the advantage of the stronger, and the gods think nothing of human suffering or happiness. They are always doing what is hurtful to individuals.’ ‘May not some god be good?’ ‘Yes; but he is not just, especially if Thrasymachus is right in saying that injustice is stronger than justice.’ ‘Well,’ I said, ‘let me tell you why I think the gods must care about men being just.’ ‘Why?’ ‘They like to see people doing their own work and not other people’s. Is not that natural and agreeable and fitting? When I am jockeying at Olympia or anywhere else, I am always pleased when someone comes who can hold the horses while I go and have a drink. And when old men have taken to sitting still, who used to be active, if anyone comes and carries their burdens they are very glad. Children, too, are pleased and happy when their playthings are made fast for them; in that way they gain both pleasure and utility. The gods are truly skilled in arranging and catering for all such matters whether they be bodily or mental—just or unjust, gentle or violent, good or evil which concern either gods or men or animals, making them suitable and adapted to each other. The end is always harmony, and the governance of the whole by the best. Now the just is best, and the just life is ordained by the gods as the most suitable for man; and therefore the gods must like justice and must hate injustice. Let us suppose, then, that they make laws and enact just things against unjust, and enforce them, because they think that obedience to them will be best for society: and let us suppose also that you were found making default and refusing to obey the just laws of the state, and telling lies about the gods, and saying that they only like you when you disobey them—that would you believe yourself or the state?’ ‘Clearly the state,’ he replied. ‘Then you think that the state is wise and you are not wise? Is that what you are saying, now, and does that really seem to you to be probable—that you who know so much should be the only man who knows nothing, and the state who knows nothing should be perfectly wise?’ 11 11 "Heaven forbid! I said; I would only ask you to be consistent; or,if you change, change openly and let there be no deception. For Imust remark, Thrasymachus, if you will recall what was previouslysaid, that although you began by defining the true physician in anexact sense, you did not observe a like exactness when speaking ofthe shepherd; you thought that the shepherd as a shepherd tends thesheep not with a view to their own good, but like a mere diner orbanqueter with a view to the pleasures of the table; or, again, asa trader for sale in the market, and not as a shepherd. Yet surelythe art of the shepherd is concerned only with the good of his subjects;he has only to provide the best for them, since the perfection ofthe art is already ensured whenever all the requirements of it aresatisfied. And that was what I was saying just now about the ruler.I conceived that the art of the ruler, considered as ruler, whetherin a state or in private life, could only regard the good of his flockor subjects; whereas you seem to think that the rulers in states,that is to say, the true rulers, like being in authority. Think! Nay, I am sure of it. Then why in the case of lesser offices do men never take them willinglywithout payment, unless under the idea that they govern for the advantagenot of themselves but of others? Let me ask you a question: Are notthe several arts different, by reason of their each having a separatefunction? And, my dear illustrious friend, do say what you think,that we may make a little progress. Yes, that is the difference, he replied. And each art gives us a particular good and not merely a general one--medicine, for example, gives us health; navigation, safety at sea,and so on? @@ -278,12 +278,12 @@ Certainly, he confers a benefit. Then now, Thrasymachus, there is no longer any And this is the reason, my dear Thrasymachus, why, as I was just nowsaying, no one is willing to govern; because no one likes to takein hand the reformation of evils which are not his concern withoutremuneration. For, in the execution of his work, and in giving hisorders to another, the true artist does not regard his own interest,but always that of his subjects; and therefore in order that rulersmay be willing to rule, they must be paid in one of three modes ofpayment: money, or honour, or a penalty for refusing. Socrates - GLAUCON What do you mean, Socrates? said Glaucon. The first two modes of paymentare intelligible enough, but what the penalty is I do not understand,or how a penalty can be a payment." "Summary: A conversation between Thrasymachus and Socrates about the role of rulers and shepherds in society. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled -Speech standard: Informal, raw +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation Active character: Thrasymachus, Socrates -Time setting: Contemporary" In the States that are well-administered, the rulers will be gentle and the subjects obedient. But if the State is badly administered, then, as in a great household, the masters of the house will fall out with one another, and the servants will be idle; there will be misfortune without, war abroad, and sedition at home; there will be no good government of families or States, and the whole flock will be tumbled into the mire;—that is to say, if you are right, Thrasymachus, and rulers are only shepherds of the State.” “You have taken the illustration from me,” he said. “Yes,” I replied, “but I very far follow where the argument leads.” “And are you not aware,” he said, “that you have made a grand omission when you spoke of the shepherd breaking the dog, and similar images?” “What omission?” I asked. “You should have pointed out,” he replied, “when you told us how the bad shepherd was punished by the State, that the good shepherd also is sometimes punished, and that if he does not attend to the interests of his flock the bad may get an advantage over him, and drive him out.” “Aye,” I said, “and that often happens, Thrasymachus; but suppose that he is not allowed to be driven out; will the perfect shepherd allow the dogs who are set over him to wreak their fury upon him, or will he seek to save himself?” “He must save himself,” he replied; “but we do not understand how he is to do so.” “Even if he has to die in the endeavour,” I answered; “for surely, Thrasymachus, if he lets go his own guardianship and looks after the affairs of others, whether they will or no, he is no longer a guardian of the herd, but a slave of slaves, and a shepherd of other people’s sheep—a sort of beast of burden; and this is clearly of the lowest character and in the highest degree bad.” “Good heavens!” he exclaimed; “did ever any one, man or woman, take the trouble to devise so extravagant a notion? He who, as you say, is able to defend himself against unjust attacks—that is to say, against attacks on which he starts on account of his own injustice—he, I say, is a mere shadow of a guardian; and if he cannot defend himself, he is not a shepherd either.” “Now,” I said, “shall I answer you after your fashion with another jest, or will you be content with this sample of my wit, and answer me with seriousness?” “I will certainly try,” he replied. “Then I will proceed as seriously as I can; and first of all, as we were saying before, there would be many difficulties in herding and tending a heterogeneous multitude of animals, even if there could be a possibility of our success; for different species of animals require different sorts of treatment; and if any of them has not the right sort, it perishes.” +Time setting: 1950s" In this country,” he said, “the shepherd is a herdsman, and his business is to provide the sheep with grass and water, and when they are hungry to give them food, and when they are cold to give them clothing; and when they fall ill, to see what is the matter with them, and when they are in health to have them medically attended to. And when there is any of their flock which has no fleece or is diseased, he separates it from the other sheep. Now you will clearly not be able to do all these things unless you know what the different diseases mean; for example, if one is blind, you will not give it sight, if you do not know what it is which makes men blind; if one is deaf, you will not restore hearing by simply saying that you will make him hear, unless you know what is the cause of his deafness.” “Yes, he will,” I said. “But if you were a physician,” he said, “you would soon perceive that you would never be able even to cure the sick, much less prevent their being sick, without knowledge, and especially of medicine and the arts.” “Very true,” I said. “Then again, if you wish to plant corn, or vines, or fruit-trees, or anything else, excepting vegetables which grow spontaneously, you must surely have knowledge of the nature of the soil, and of irrigation, and of the climate, and of the seeds which you are to sow, and of the times at which you should graze and dig and hoe; or you will never be able to manage house, land, or servants.” “Certainly not,” I said. “And now tell me,” he said, “what do you consider to be the best and wisest course? Is it not that neither you nor anyone should attend to anything but the business of ruling? Or shall the art of the shepherd and the art of the ruler be combined in one?” “Not likely,” I said; “the rulers will not be shepherds, and yet they will be guardians. And their souls will be better than those of bees, for they will not care about their own pleasures and joys, but only about the virtues which are going to make the city happy?” “These then,” he said, “are really the qualities which we are looking for?” “Yes.” “And did we not say just now that the guardians ought to possess courage?” “We did.” “And what was the virtue which went along with courage, and of which both the courageous and the foolhardy partook?” “You told me,” I said. “Weren’t you listening? The answer was temperance.” “True.” “And do you think,” he said, “that the well-educated man who is a true ruler at the right moment, in a right place, on the right subject, and with the right men, and who is able to bring true wisdom to bear on his work, do you think that such a man will fail to do good?” “He will indeed do good,” I said. “Then, my noble and illustrious friend,” he said, “we have found the guardian; let us go on to the next point. 12 12 "You mean that you do not understand the nature of this payment whichto the best men is the great inducement to rule? Of course you knowthat ambition and avarice are held to be, as indeed they are, a disgrace? Very true. And for this reason, I said, money and honour have no attraction forthem; good men do not wish to be openly demanding payment for governingand so to get the name of hirelings, nor by secretly helping themselvesout of the public revenues to get the name of thieves. And not beingambitious they do not care about honour. Wherefore necessity mustbe laid upon them, and they must be induced to serve from the fearof punishment. And this, as I imagine, is the reason why the forwardnessto take office, instead of waiting to be compelled, has been deemeddishonourable. Now the worst part of the punishment is that he whorefuses to rule is liable to be ruled by one who is worse than himself.And the fear of this, as I conceive, induces the good to take office,not because they would, but because they cannot help --not under theidea that they are going to have any benefit or enjoyment themselves,but as a necessity, and because they are not able to commit the taskof ruling to any one who is better than themselves, or indeed as good.For there is reason to think that if a city were composed entirelyof good men, then to avoid office would be as much an object of contentionas to obtain office is at present; then we should have plain proofthat the true ruler is not meant by nature to regard his own interest,but that of his subjects; and every one who knew this would chooserather to receive a benefit from another than to have the troubleof conferring one. So far am I from agreeing with Thrasymachus thatjustice is the interest of the stronger. This latter question neednot be further discussed at present; but when Thrasymachus says thatthe life of the unjust is more advantageous than that of the just,his new statement appears to me to be of a far more serious character.Which of us has spoken truly? And which sort of life, Glaucon, doyou prefer? I for my part deem the life of the just to be the more advantageous,he answered. @@ -300,13 +300,13 @@ What a charming notion! So likely too, seeing that I affirm injusticeto be profi What else then would you say? The opposite, he replied. And would you call justice vice? No, I would rather say sublime simplicity. Then would you call injustice malignity? No; I would rather say discretion. And do the unjust appear to you to be wise and good? Yes, he said; at any rate those of them who are able to be perfectlyunjust, and who have the power of subduing states and nations; butperhaps you imagine me to be talking of cutpurses. Even this profession if undetected has advantages, though they arenot to be compared with those of which I was just now speaking." "Summary: The text discusses the nature of ruling and governing, arguing that good men do not seek power for personal gain but out of necessity. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog between Socrates and Glaucon -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Active character: Socrates, Glaucon, Thrasymachus" Socrates. Und eben das ist es, was die Regierenden in der Regel nicht leiden knnen, wenn sie sich vorstellen mssen, da die Leute von dem ihnen zukommenden Vermgen keine Anschauung haben und deshalb nur darin bestehen knnen, sie durch ihr Eigentum zu verwahren und ihren Glcksknpfen zu dienen. Also sind sie gar nicht imstande, fr ihre Gter Sorge zu tragen, sondern da der Schaden davontrgt, der auf sie herabfllt. Denn es kann kein Mensch glauben, da eine solche Herrschaft von guter Menschen ausgebt wird, denn diese beherrschen alles nur aus Notwendigkeit und berlegen nicht mehr als die anderen: Da ein jeder nach seinen Krften und Vermgen so viel wie mglich erreichen soll, und da er, wenn er nichts erreicht, doch nicht verhungern soll. Das aber ist unmglich, wenn andere allein besitzen und wirtschaften. Wenn man aber einen Eindringling findet, der ohne Wissen oder Erlaubnis in sein Haus eindringt und dort alles verwahrt, so hat man Mitleid mit ihm, aber wrde ihn doch hinauswerfen, wenn er sich weigert fortzugehen. Thrasymachus. Du liebst die Ironie, Sokrates! Socrates. Weit du denn, wer die Herren sind? Thrasymachus. Natrlich die Starken. Socrates. Wie aber, wenn einer unter den Starken Macht an sich reit und willwrks wird? Glt dann noch die Erklrung zu? Thrasymachus. Die gleiche. Socrates. Also auch der Tyrann? Thrasymachus. Ja, der Tyrann, denn er ist immer stark. Socrates. Werden wir also sagen, da dieser die Herren ist, und er sei gerecht? Thrasymachus. Soll er's nicht sein? Socrates. Sei's drum! Aber jetzt versuche ich zu beweisen, da das Zutrauen auf die Strenge eines Mnners, der heut noch seiner Nchte wegen schimpflich geachtet wird, und morgen schon Rechtsprechung fhrt, ungrundetlich ist. Weisst du noch, da einer von diesen Mnneren zum Richter kam und die Entscheidung ber eine Klage zwischen zwei Feinden traf? Nun, wie ging's? Sagte er nicht zu den Anwesenden, da er fr den einen Partei nehme, der die Schwche habe, und den andern, der die Strke habe, bestrafen werde? Und es geschah ebenso, wie er sprach; denn der Starke ward bestraft, der Schwache aber befreit. Dies tat er nun aus Rache an dem ersten und nicht aus Gutemwillen. Aber ich sage dir, da der ehrliche Mann, der Richter, die Strafe richtete, um seine Neigung fr den Schwachen zu zeigen und nicht um ihn zu bestrafen. Damit er zwar das Geld und die Ehre des andern genieen konnte, aber den Verdacht der Bseheit abwehren wollte. Wo aber war denn hier die Gerechtigkeit, wenn nicht in dem Wesen der Gerechtigkeit selbst? Denn wer von uns glaubt, da die Gerechtigkeit auf ihrer eigentmlichen Stelle steht, wird wahrhaftig nicht leicht einen Richter finden, der gegen die Bestrafung der Guten und die Freilassung der Bsen entscheidet, obwohl er selber vllig gewi ist, da er selbst nicht von den Guten ist, sondern einem der Bsen angehrte. Der ehrliche Mann aber, welcher den Richter spielte, ward von den Guten geliebt und von den Bsen geha, weil er den Letztern das Recht streifte und den Ersteren die Ehre gab. +Active character: Socrates, Glaucon, Thrasymachus" Gewi, ich will ihnen sagen, was die Herrschaft ist. Das ist, da einer ein andres zu dumm und zu schwach ist, um sein eigner Herr zu sein; dieser nun macht sich also an einen anderen, der bessern Kopf hat, und lebt so wie ein Pferd, das kein Geschirr hat, oder eine Frau, die keinen Mann hat, von ihm ab. Und wer den Starken, Klugen, Schnellen, Stacheligen, Wilden in seinem Innern beherrscht, der regiert ber alle diese Tiere, so lange sie nicht gewaltsam ausbrechen. Diese Beherrschung des Innern aber wird Frstenregierung genannt. - Ich frchte, sagte Glaukon, da du uns wieder unartig machst. - Doch verlangt ihr auch, da wir uns artig betragen? fragte Socrates. - Ja wohl, antwortete er, und nichts lieber. - So hrt auf mich zuzuschreien! sprach jener. Auch er erwiderte: Wir wollen's versuchen. - Nun denn, es ist nicht leicht, da ein guter Mann nach seiner Natur Herrscher werde, sondern eher der schlechteste. Denn ein guter Mann braucht ja niemand, denn er wird alles so gescheit und gut machen, wie es nur geht; er mag auch nicht warten, bis es ihm gelegen kommt, sondern tut es, wenn es not tut. Der schlechtere aber kann gar nicht anders; denn da er nicht allein gedeihen kann, mu er sich mit einem andern zusammentun, und indem er ihn niederdrckt, regiert er. Es ist nicht groziger als ein groer Mann, der eine kleine Frau nimmt und ihr Vater wird, und sie zwingt, ihm alles zu tun, was er befehlen will, weil sie doch klein ist. Ein groer Mann aber braucht keine andere; denn er kann alles selbst tun, was not tut. Da aber der Regierende am schlechtesten ist, und der Regierte am besten, und beide sich weder willig noch heimlich entwenden knnen, ohne sich wegzugeben, so mu sie notwendig eintragen mssen, unter der Bedingung freilich, da der Starkere sich an der Schwcheren vergreift, und dabei wohl oder wehe hat. Dieses aber ist die Herrschaft, Thrasymachos. - Ich merke dich, sagte jener, aber ich habe noch etwas hinzusetzen. Der beste ist immer auch der grste, und der grste sucht nach dem Regieren, um das Beste zu haben. Also ist der Grsse seine Regel, der sich des Besten bedient, und der Grsse seine Triebfedern, damit er alles, was er hat, zu gebrauchen wei. Und das ist die wahre Regierung. - Hast du's gesagt, Thrasymachos? rief Glaukon. 13 13 "I do not think that I misapprehend your meaning, Thrasymachus, I replied;but still I cannot hear without amazement that you class injusticewith wisdom and virtue, and justice with the opposite. Certainly I do so class them. Now, I said, you are on more substantial and almost unanswerable ground;for if the injustice which you were maintaining to be profitable hadbeen admitted by you as by others to be vice and deformity, an answermight have been given to you on received principles; but now I perceivethat you will call injustice honourable and strong, and to the unjustyou will attribute all the qualities which were attributed by us beforeto the just, seeing that you do not hesitate to rank injustice withwisdom and virtue. You have guessed most infallibly, he replied. Then I certainly ought not to shrink from going through with the argumentso long as I have reason to think that you, Thrasymachus, are speakingyour real mind; for I do believe that you are now in earnest and arenot amusing yourself at our expense. @@ -331,15 +331,15 @@ Yes. And do you think, my excellent friend, that a musician when he adjuststhe l I do not think that he would. But he would claim to exceed the non-musician? Of course. And what would you say of the physician? In prescribing meats anddrinks would he wish to go beyond another physician or beyond thepractice of medicine?" "Summary: The speaker is having a conversation with Thrasymachus about justice and injustice, questioning whether injustice can be considered wise and virtuous. Trope: The debate between good and evil Narrative arc: Argumentative -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Plato's philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Thrasymachus -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "I'm a businessman, and I don't know what you fellows are talking about. But you can bet that if any of the chaps in my office tried to put over anything like this, I'd fire them right away. We don't want any damned anarchists around here."""" And Thrasymachus burst out laughing. The laughter ran through me like a cold shiver. It was a laugh full of scorn and cruelty. A laugh that made me shrink inside. Then he said, """"I see we'll have to teach you some manners first. Listen, you: I am a philosopher. I don't work for a living; I live on philosophy. It is my business to understand things, not yours or anyone else's. You think you're pretty smart, do you?"""" Yes,"" I said. ""I suppose I am."" Well, you're wrong. You're just a half-baked fool, and you know it yourself."""" No, I don't!"" I cried. ""I'm smarter than you are."" Nonsense,"" he said. ""You're nothing but a big talker. You haven't got an idea in your head."""" That's a lie!"" I yelled. ""I'm as good as you are. Maybe better."""" No you're not!"" he shouted back at me. ""You're just a fool. All right, let's see how much you know. Do you know what justice is?"""" Yes,"" I said, ""of course I do."" Well?"" I'm not going to tell you!"" Oh, you're not?"" he sneered. ""Then I'll tell you. Justice is doing what you can get away with."""" I've heard that before."" Haven't you got any sense? It's true! That's all there is to it. Justice is injustice. Injustice is justice. Get it?"""" Yes,"" I said. ""I guess so."" He stared at me for a minute. """"You're just pretending to be stupid,"""" he said. """"You know very well that if somebody tries to murder you, or rob you, or beat you up, then it's all right to fight back. But if you go and try to steal something from somebody who hasn't got anything, then they call the cops and lock you up. So justice isn't fair. And if you ask me, it's a lot of bull."""" I thought about it for a minute. """"But doesn't everybody agree about justice?"""" Of course they do. Everybody agrees that it's better to be rich and powerful than poor and weak. So if you want to be rich and powerful, you have to be just, and give people their due. You have to obey the law, and you have to cheat and steal and lie when you can get away with it. That's justice."""" I didn't say anything for a while. Then I said, """"So you don't believe in God?"""" " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" And when he had got this far, and still more as he proceeded, the harshness of his voice and his vivid gestures and manner made him appear like a savage beast, which he felt himself to be. And now he came to the real point at which he meant to hit us. He began by saying that there was such a thing as a just man and also a just action; but whereas we were accustomed to speak of both in a fictitious sense only, he on the contrary meant just what he said. No man who was really just did anything unjust for the sake of justice, or underwent anything unjust, because he was just: for no man does what he knows is hurtful to himself, or any other person whom he loves. And thus in every action alike, whether public or private, when a man is engaged in any work, however slight, if he preserves his justice, he will always take least trouble for himself and the most trouble for others; this is the maxim which all who practise, or even understand, justice will observe. Now injustice, which is in every action opposed to justice, and is, as it were, its foe and enemy, making for the interest of the stronger, and opposing and encroaching upon the weak, does nothing unjust for the sake of justice, but only with a view to the interest of the stronger. For when you speak of a just man and an unjust man, you only mean a man who is strong enough to do wrong and is therefore thought to be worthy of honour, and a weakling who is taken advantage of by others and cannot do wrong. And this is the reason why we say a man is a fool who allows himself to be wrongly treated, not because he suffers what is unjust, but because he need not have suffered it, he might have avoided it by taking care of himself. The fact of his letting himself be killed by another, though he might have escaped, shows that he must either have been a fool, or have had no fear of death whatever, or some such feeling. And when we praise or blame men, or any other animals, for doing or not doing something, for being bold or fearful, for showing self-control or lack of self-control, we are giving them names of which the meaning is simply this, that they derive benefit or the reverse from their own qualities. Thus when the just man suffers or does not suffer anything unjust, or again the courageous man shows his spirit or is subdued by circumstances, they are merely names which imply that the just or the courageous man, if he happens to be put to it, escapes, or otherwise would have been a victim. And so, Socrates, whenever we call any man, whether an individual or a state, just, we mean that he is not overcome by violence; and so too the brave man is he who is not overcome by fear: and where there is no fear there is no danger; but the brave man goes through danger, yet is not overcome by fear concerning danger. 14 14 "He would not. But he would wish to go beyond the non-physician? Yes. And about knowledge and ignorance in general; see whether you thinkthat any man who has knowledge ever would wish to have the choiceof saying or doing more than another man who has knowledge. Wouldhe not rather say or do the same as his like in the same case? That, I suppose, can hardly be denied. And what of the ignorant? would he not desire to have more than eitherthe knowing or the ignorant? I dare say. And the knowing is wise? Yes. And the wise is good? True. Then the wise and good will not desire to gain more than his like,but more than his unlike and opposite? @@ -363,13 +363,13 @@ That is out of civility to you, he replied. You are very kind, I said; and would No indeed, he said, they could not. But if they abstained from injuring one another, then they might acttogether better? Yes. And this is because injustice creates divisions and hatreds and fighting,and justice imparts harmony and friendship; is not that true, Thrasymachus? I agree, he said, because I do not wish to quarrel with you." "Summary: A conversation between two characters about knowledge, justice, and power. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Active character: Thrasymachus, Socrates" "And now the question arises, Have you any knowledge of justice and injustice? Do you know the use which they make of it in their dealings with one another?"""" Surely,"" he said. ""No one will deny that."" Well then, I suppose that you have heard people saying to one another, as you may have heard yourself, 'Let the just man take what is his own,' and 'Persuade or force the unjust to make restitution?' Have you not heard these words?"" Of course."" And have you not often heard them said in many forms?"""" Yes."""" Then I presume that you have heard also the other part of the dialogue between them? Don't I remember that you have heard one of them reply as if speaking to himself, 'O that I could take what belongs to the man who has got my property!' You must surely remember that?"" Yes, I am quite aware of that."" But still I should like to be sure. Now when you hear all this talk, do you think that they are merely talking for the sake of conversation, without caring whether what they say is true or false, or do you suppose that they really wish to discover the truth about justice and injustice?"""" I should imagine, Socrates, that they really wish to arrive at the truth."" Then you will admit that they are trying to find out in what does justice consist?"""" To be sure."" And when they begin affirming that justice is one thing and injustice another, they are not speaking, as we were just now supposing, for the sake of conversation? They are not uttering, in a vulgar and impressionable manner, any doctrine which chance may have suggested to them? They believe that there is some meaning in what they are saying?"""" Certainly, they ought to have some meaning."" Then can you imagine that one of them says to the other, 'O yes, Thrasymachus, I know that justice is doing your own business and not meddling with other men's, and that injustice is just the opposite of this' while he believes that injustice is better than justice? If he had believed this he would have done his own business and not meddled with other men's, and thus he would have been perfectly just and would not have cared about injustice. Can you conceive that he would have uttered such words if he had believed that injustice is better than justice?"""" Why, Socrates,"" said Thrasymachus, ""do you really think that other people have any belief at all about the just and unjust other than yourselves?"""" Nay, my noble friend,"" I repudiated the latter half of his remark, and asserted the first; that others have no belief, but that you are the only man in the world who truly knows justice and injustice. """"But let us proceed no further with you, while this passion to which you are subject remains. I see quite clearly that you have nothing to say; for if you had, you would have said it long ago, and none of us would have stopped you. " +Active character: Thrasymachus, Socrates" “Know then that I am a philosopher, a disciple of the great Glaucon. He is now dead; but his father, Ariston, your grandfather, Socrates, will remember him. I am very desirous of meeting another disciple of his, whom I have never seen, Plato. Will you ask him to come here? That is if he has leisure, for I have heard that he is very busy at present trying to get rid of an attack of daimonism.” “What!” said Thrasymachus, with a sneer, “and is Plato attacked by one of those little devils which he is so fond of introducing into his poems and dialogues?” “I don’t know,” said Socrates; “but I can tell you what sort of a devil my devil is: he is a big un, and he roars and makes a noise, and has got one nail in his hand which is as like a bit of whity-britches as you could wish to see; and there he sits and howls in my ear, and is always telling me to go to work and make money, because I am a rich man and a churl, and he fears that sometime or other I shall be poisoned or stabbed in some such way.” “Capital!” said Thrasymachus, “that is the way to treat daimonism! But listen to some other particulars: he is a thin old man, beardless, lecherous, egg-sucking, bird-nesting, apple-throwing, hoobat-worshipping, and snake-taming.” “Very fine!” said Socrates, “and how does the dialogue go on?” “The next thing is that you are always dressing up and decorating yourself, and that you are perpetually dancing and singing and telling stories, and playing the bagpipe to a company of young men who drink too much, spend all their money, and use their bodies coarsely.” “You mean to say, my dear fellow, that I am like the rest of the world?” “Yes, I do; and you take pains to make yourself like them.” Socrates held down his head, and was silent for a moment or two. Then he looked up at Thrasymachus, and said: “Tell me, Thrasymachus, why are you so hard upon me? I thought we were friends.” “What business have I to be a friend to you?” said Thrasymachus. “If you are not unjust, I am not either; if you are unjust, I can’t be your friend—surely not. Is there a man who is a friend of the brave, when he is cowardly? or of the pious, when he is impious? No certainly: justice is a good which cannot abide without another good, and therefore he who would be your friend must himself share your virtue, and cannot be your friend if you are unjust.” “This,” said Socrates, “is not a very cordial answer, Thrasymachus, as I would have expected of you.” “And why not?” he asked. “Because I am not sure whether I was right or not, and I should not like, if others could help it, to be left out of the list of good men.” “Why, my good friend,” said Thrasymachus, “did you not hear just now the definition which was given of justice? And yet that was as good a definition as any. 15 15 "How good of you, I said; but I should like to know also whether injustice,having this tendency to arouse hatred, wherever existing, among slavesor among freemen, will not make them hate one another and set themat variance and render them incapable of common action? Certainly. And even if injustice be found in two only, will they not quarreland fight, and become enemies to one another and to the just They will. And suppose injustice abiding in a single person, would your wisdomsay that she loses or that she retains her natural power? @@ -387,17 +387,17 @@ True. May we not say that this is the end of a pruning-hook? We may. Then now I I understand your meaning, he said, and assent. And that to which an end is appointed has also an excellence? NeedI ask again whether the eye has an end? It has. And has not the eye an excellence? Yes. And the ear has an end and an excellence also? True. And the same is true of all other things; they have each of them anend and a special excellence?" "Summary: The speaker discusses the nature of injustice and its consequences, arguing that it leads to conflict and enmity. They then discuss the question of whether just people lead better lives than unjust people. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical argument -Literary movement: Platonism +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The speaker and Thrasymachus -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" “Now, there is a class of men who say that justice is doing what one likes. This must be one of the definitions which you were referring to just now.” “Certainly,” he said; “but I cannot at the moment give you the exact words.” “You remember the rest?” I said, “that injustice is doing as one likes?” “Yes, that was clearly said by the wise men whom we were talking of.” “And have there not been many persons who have found another definition of justice in the word convention? These are the men who say that justice is whatever the law ordains.” “Yes,” he replied, “they might easily be supposed to be speaking the truth.” “A third class of persons supposes that what is natural is just, and they think that to do violence is unjust and evil.” “True,” he said. “Yet again, some thought that the stronger principle is necessarily also the just; for example, that the rule of a State is right which overcomes its enemies, or that mastery in any other form is given by nature to a man with a superior strength, and that a state is made up of those who are stronger or weaker.” “Nay, there may be another definition of justice,” I said. “Those who consider fairness the principal thing would say that justice is fairness.” “Undoubtedly,” he said, “they, too, would have their own private theory of just and unjust.” “There is another class of persons,” I said, “who imagine that justice is the quality of giving every one his due; and they demand from a physician or an athlete, or anyone else, mastery of his art, and define what is his own proper mastery as justice and honourable, and what is another’s as injustice and dishonourable. There are said to be many such varieties of justice and honour—some are the subjects of master-craftsmen, others are the qualities of high birth, others of wealth—accordingly there are arts of justice also, in which either the few or the many are able to excel, but never all together.” “I understand,” he replied. “Then now we have come to the point at which we make our first definition of justice. Justice on this view will be the same in a State which is ordered by nature and in a State which is not ordered by nature; for he would say that what is done by nature and by art in the same things is always alike; and this is the manner in which the just is always arranged in States. And this is the reason why in Stoic we apply the term ‘just’ rather to the regulation of the State than to the distribution of kindred goods. Whichever of these two an individual or State chooses as the end of the art he will desire to obtain, and if he does not obtain it, will seek in vain. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "You have a splendid gift for rhetoric, which you turn to the uses of injustice. Do you really believe all that stuff about injustice being more profitable than justice?"""" Yes, I do."" Then I give you your choice. If you are just, we shall be friends and kinsmen, but if unjust, enemies and foes."""" All right. I prefer to be just, if you are just."""" There is nothing to prevent us from being both just."" No; though it would be strange if you were just."" He gave me a sharp look, then turned away and began walking towards the house. I followed him up the hill, and we entered the library together. Thrasymachus was already there. He had been talking to an old man whom I did not know, and who left us as soon as he saw me. """"There's another friend of yours,"""" said Thrasymachus. """"I suppose you'll make him a present of that book next."""" This was his way of speaking. The old man looked at us rather sourly as he went out. His name was Cargill. Are you going?"" asked Thrasymachus. I nodded. As far as the corner shop. I'm due on duty in ten minutes."" It struck me that this was a convenient arrangement, since it left me free to continue my conversation with Thrasymachus after the others had gone. I felt no great enthusiasm for their company, nor they for mine. They seemed to regard me as a kind of fifth wheel on the coach, and probably wished I could be removed. I myself wished that I could be removed, though not quite in the sense they intended. * * * * * Well,"" said Thrasymachus, ""how about it?"""" How about what?"" The question we were discussing when Glum came in. Whether just people lead better lives than unjust people."""" Certainly,"" I said. ""It follows logically from our earlier discussion."""" Do you mean to say you've thought about it?"" Of course I have. You can't discuss a subject like that without thinking about it. And I think I've got it worked out pretty well. I'm sure I have the basic idea, anyway."""" Thrasymachus raised his eyebrows. """"Let's hear it,"""" he said. I took a deep breath. """"The basic idea,"""" I said, """"is this: injustice always leads to conflict and enmity, and therefore just people lead better lives than unjust people because they have fewer conflicts and enmities."""" Thrasymachus guffawed. """"What utter rot!"""" he said. """"You're just talking like an ass. Just tell me one thing: What do you consider the prime motivation of human beings?"""" " 16 16 "That is so. Well, and can the eyes fulfil their end if they are wanting in theirown proper excellence and have a defect instead? How can they, he said, if they are blind and cannot see? You mean to say, if they have lost their proper excellence, whichis sight; but I have not arrived at that point yet. I would ratherask the question more generally, and only enquire whether the thingswhich fulfil their ends fulfil them by their own proper excellence,and fall of fulfilling them by their own defect? @@ -421,16 +421,16 @@ I should wish really to persuade you, I replied, if I could. Then you certainly have not succeeded. Let me ask you now: --How wouldyou arrange goods --are there not some which we welcome for theirown sakes, and independently of their consequences, as, for example,harmless pleasures and enjoyments, which delight us at the time, althoughnothing follows from them? I agree in thinking that there is such a class, I replied. Is there not also a second class of goods, such as knowledge, sight,health, which are desirable not only in themselves, but also for theirresults?" "Summary: The text discusses the relationship between justice and happiness, with Socrates and Glaucon debating the nature of justice. -Enunciation: Dialogue -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue Active character: Socrates, Glaucon -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" You might as well say that a man who is moderately just is equally just with one who is perfectly and thoroughly just, or that there is no difference between a man who is moderately drunk and one who is on the point of being so. Whereas the truth is that to go from moderate justice to perfect injustice is far nearer and easier than to proceed in the opposite direction. My point being that if justice does not benefit the unjust, he will go from moderate degrees of injustice to complete injustice quite readily and without any sense of injustice; for each step will be to him comparatively small. But when a man who was previously perfectly just becomes perfectly unjust, then he has far to go, and must suffer and make a struggle, and the progress is not painless.” “So you would say,” remarked Glaucon, “that justice rather benefits the unjust than the just man?” “Yes,” replied Socrates, “so we should certainly say that, at least in respect of their life here.” “And yet I dare say,” said Polemarchus, “that most men would find more trouble in doing wrong than right, if they cared much about either.” “They would,” said Socrates; “yes, my friend, because they are not philosophers.” “Why is that?” asked Glaucon. “Because,” answered Socrates, “it is difficult to avoid giving pain to one’s friend when one wants to take something away from him.” “That is very true,” said Polemarchus. “But what has that to do with philosophy? Do not all artists aim at producing pleasure?” “Yes,” said Glaucon, “they certainly do.” “Then,” said Socrates, “we are right in saying that painters and other artists aim at producing pleasure?” “Clearly,” he replied. “And taking pleasure is painful?” “How so?” “Because,” said Socrates, “you have not observed carefully the nature of the painter and his works.” “I can’t say that I have.” “Do you observe how he begins: first he draws an outline, which, when finished, he fills in, making the parts smaller, but the whole larger, and thus giving more strength to the composition as a whole? Now see how this process of painting corresponds with the work of the good husbandman, who takes a number of seeds and gathers them into one; he reduces the many to the one, and this he does with a view to the highest advantage. And this is the way in which the good musician and the good general proceed; having many notes or many soldiers, they reduce them to harmony or order, and then, when they have made them similar, they make them greater by combining them into one. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" The justice which we have now defined is seen to be such as you and most people suppose justice to be, inasmuch as you deem that a just man ought not to possess knowledge which he should keep to himself, but should give it away to others; for all men believe this, Glaucon, if they believe anything at all. But do we believe what follows from this? May not justice be a man's own greatest good? You know, I said, that the just man who was our pattern is certainly good and worthy of happiness. Now, is there anyone who would say that he who is good and worthy of happiness, if he were in some solitary place, not meaning or desiring to injure any one, would still be unjust? No one will affirm this. And is there anyone who would say that he who has the power to do what he wishes would employ another to benefit himself and harm another, even if he had no need to use him, if being in want he could have benefitted himself without hurting another? No one again will affirm this. But if a man does not desire to benefit others, then if he can benefit himself he will do so, and if he does not choose to be benefited by others, then he will benefit himself when he can. Now one who is necessary, and who can do what he wishes, appears also to be capable of acting in every way as he wishes. Wherefore we may confidently assert that if justice is not the greatest good of a man he will fly from injustice and choose justice, above all other things, because a man would surely prefer nothing to having his own; yet if he is rich, justice is, even for the possessor of wealth, better than riches, if justice is really good, as it manifestly is. Thus justice is found to be beneficial both to a man himself and to others; he who possesses justice in his own case does not suffer injustice, and he neither inflicts it nor encourages others to inflict it. We cannot call a man unjust who is the friend of justice and of the just, and therefore of himself and of his neighbours; but, if he is the enemy of himself, the enemy of neighbours, and the enemy of justice, if anywhere a man is unjust, he is an enemy to himself, clear enough. Nay, the very act of seeking to avoid suffering injustice proves that he, whatever he may be, desires to be just. The truth of all this, Glaucon, is evident to everybody. Then now, my noble friend, we have fairly avoided the difficulty which might perhaps have been urged against us, namely, that justice is useful to others and not to the individual. Suppose, however, that we divide the subject into two parts, saying that one part is the nature and the other the utility of justice: the former would be supposed to have been already discussed by us, and the latter we shall have to discuss in future; that question, then, having been disposed of, let us proceed at once to enquire into the nature of injustice, for we shall soon find out also the nature of the just. 17 17 "Certainly, I said. And would you not recognize a third class, such as gymnastic, andthe care of the sick, and the physician's art; also the various waysof money-making --these do us good but we regard them as disagreeable;and no one would choose them for their own sakes, but only for thesake of some reward or result which flows from them? There is, I said, this third class also. But why do you ask? Because I want to know in which of the three classes you would placejustice? @@ -443,30 +443,30 @@ I am delighted, he replied, to hear you say so, and shall begin byspeaking, as I Glaucon They say that to do injustice is, by nature, good; to suffer injustice,evil; but that the evil is greater than the good. And so when menhave both done and suffered injustice and have had experience of both,not being able to avoid the one and obtain the other, they think thatthey had better agree among themselves to have neither; hence therearise laws and mutual covenants; and that which is ordained by lawis termed by them lawful and just. This they affirm to be the originand nature of justice; --it is a mean or compromise, between the bestof all, which is to do injustice and not be punished, and the worstof all, which is to suffer injustice without the power of retaliation;and justice, being at a middle point between the two, is toleratednot as a good, but as the lesser evil, and honoured by reason of theinability of men to do injustice. For no man who is worthy to be calleda man would ever submit to such an agreement if he were able to resist;he would be mad if he did. Such is the received account, Socrates,of the nature and origin of justice." "Summary: The speaker discusses the different classes of goods and their relationship to justice. Narrative arc: Philosophical argument -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonism +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The speaker, Glaucon -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" The harder goods will be the more valuable, and vice versa; and justice in respect of them will be to do good to your friends and harm to your enemies. But I suspect that you have not yet perceived the whole truth about them: for suppose that one is a strong man and the other weak, the stronger will be able to take away the property of the weaker by force.” “Yes,” he said, “that is very likely.” “Then,” I continued, “the advantage of strength will make him rich, and the rich man will be drawn to the nobler life when he sees that strength is dearer than money to people who are worth anything; and when they want to become their friends, without having money to buy them, then of course they offer them their services. Is not that true?” Certainly.” “Well then, you know of another way of arranging this matter; how will it be if we take the middle class as a basis, making them, as the poets say, ‘lords of the earth’—will not he who holds the reins of government be the lord of everything on earth?” “By all means.” “Then we must lengthen out the class of those who hold rule—a thing which has already been acknowledged by us to be a benefit to states and men of merit, but formerly and at present a difficulty. For if they are only few, there is danger of their being less willing to carry on the government because of the obscurity of office, and of their being unable to execute the office when they are willing, owing to their wanting assistants, and so being obliged to select guardians who are equal to themselves. These equal ones will naturally seek to rise above their equals and to prevail over them, and therefore make war upon them. And the consequence is that the rest of the state would hardly be able to keep the peace with them.” “Very true,” he said. “Then now for another way—which is a better way—of arranging this; the merely military class, if it is to be sufficiently reliable, must be an larger and more numerous than the class of farmers, which is to be the class of citizens.” “How shall we arrange them?” I asked; “how shall we find a pattern?” “I have no pattern,” he said, “but I believe that the state which you describe is most possible.” “Then,” I said, “let us experiment upon ourselves: I do not know that we shall succeed, but we may have our doubts; and if our experiment fails, then we shall fall back upon you and make you our guide.—My proposal is, then, that we change our mode of discoursing.” “How?” he said. “Why,” I replied, “we shall do as the dialecticians do.” “In what manner?” he asked. “When they are unable to answer, they answer that they know nothing; when they are asked something else, they reply that they must first ask questions, having a fancy for definition, and extorting this from you first of all.” +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "The goods that belong to the class of the just man, then, are of three kinds. First there is his own soul, secondly his possessions, and thirdly the other citizens of the city. The greatest part of a man's justice is shown by his relation to his own soul; for if he doesn't have mastery over himself, how can he be expected to have mastery over anyone else?"""" You're right,"" Glaucon said. ""But what about his relation to his possessions?"""" It's not as important as his relation to himself,"" Polemarchus said. ""He may lose everything and still remain a just man. But no one who isn't master of himself can ever be just."""" I suppose you're right,"" Glaucon said. ""So it seems that the greatest part of justice consists in a man's being master of himself."""" Certainly."" Then there's the question of his relationship to his fellow-citizens,"" Glaucon said. ""Are they an equal part of justice, or does that come somewhere below his relation to himself?"""" There again you're right,"" Polemarchus said. ""If he can't control himself, then he certainly can't control anybody else. And if he has self-control but can't control others, then he's useless to the state. " 18 18 Now that those who practise justice do so involuntarily and becausethey have not the power to be unjust will best appear if we imaginesomething of this kind: having given both to the just and the unjustpower to do what they will, let us watch and see whither desire willlead them; then we shall discover in the very act the just and unjustman to be proceeding along the same road, following their interest,which all natures deem to be their good, and are only diverted intothe path of justice by the force of law. The liberty which we aresupposing may be most completely given to them in the form of sucha power as is said to have been possessed by Gyges the ancestor ofCroesus the Lydian. According to the tradition, Gyges was a shepherdin the service of the king of Lydia; there was a great storm, andan earthquake made an opening in the earth at the place where he wasfeeding his flock. Amazed at the sight, he descended into the opening,where, among other marvels, he beheld a hollow brazen horse, havingdoors, at which he stooping and looking in saw a dead body of stature,as appeared to him, more than human, and having nothing on but a goldring; this he took from the finger of the dead and reascended. Nowthe shepherds met together, according to custom, that they might sendtheir monthly report about the flocks to the king; into their assemblyhe came having the ring on his finger, and as he was sitting amongthem he chanced to turn the collet of the ring inside his hand, wheninstantly he became invisible to the rest of the company and theybegan to speak of him as if he were no longer present. He was astonishedat this, and again touching the ring he turned the collet outwardsand reappeared; he made several trials of the ring, and always withthe same result-when he turned the collet inwards he became invisible,when outwards he reappeared. Whereupon he contrived to be chosen oneof the messengers who were sent to the court; where as soon as hearrived he seduced the queen, and with her help conspired againstthe king and slew him, and took the kingdom. Suppose now that therewere two such magic rings, and the just put on one of them and theunjust the other;,no man can be imagined to be of such an iron naturethat he would stand fast in justice. No man would keep his hands offwhat was not his own when he could safely take what he liked out ofthe market, or go into houses and lie with any one at his pleasure,or kill or release from prison whom he would, and in all respectsbe like a God among men. Then the actions of the just would be asthe actions of the unjust; they would both come at last to the samepoint. And this we may truly affirm to be a great proof that a manis just, not willingly or because he thinks that justice is any goodto him individually, but of necessity, for wherever any one thinksthat he can safely be unjust, there he is unjust. For all men believein their hearts that injustice is far more profitable to the individualthan justice, and he who argues as I have been supposing, will saythat they are right. If you could imagine any one obtaining this powerof becoming invisible, and never doing any wrong or touching whatwas another's, he would be thought by the lookers-on to be a mostwretched idiot, although they would praise him to one another's faces,and keep up appearances with one another from a fear that they toomight suffer injustice. Enough of this. "Summary: The text discusses the concept of justice and the idea that people act justly out of necessity rather than choice. Narrative arc: Philosophical argument -Enunciation: Third-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical argument -Literary movement: Enlightenment philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Gyges Absolute place: A clubhouse in Los Angeles Fuzzy place: Unnamed locations such as a storm, an opening in the earth, a hollow brazen horse -Diegetic time: A few minutes" But I believe that the very nature of justice and injustice is such that, if there is no fear of god, or of men in general, then people act justly out of necessity rather than choice. For each man naturally wishes to be master of his own instead of another’s goods. And so he takes what belongs to others, and when he has taken it, he calls it his own; and when he no longer fears that anyone will take away what he has taken, he no longer calls it a theft. And this is why we think that people who have no fear of the gods and do not think that they are being watched by human beings act unjustly with impunity because they have no idea of justice; and this, as I said, is why we say that justice is equality and that injustice is inequality.” “Well,” I said, “what you say certainly seems to be true, but nevertheless let us examine it from this point of view: suppose that one of us were to come upon a storm at night and caught up by it in some place where there was an opening in the earth, and having gone down inside, he came to a hollow brazen horse with doors on one side, and found that inside were two sorts of things, one of gold and the other of bronze, and that there was a voice telling him to choose what he would have. Now, tell me, Gyges, which of these things would you choose?” “I should take the gold and the bronze too,” he replied. “And if you had to go back into the storm again, would you make the same choice?” “Yes, I think I would.” “Then you would be right to do so, for if you had chosen the bronze you would not have been able to use it, whereas the gold, if you had chosen it, would have been useful to you. So it is likely that you would have done better if you had made the choice that you did.” “Certainly,” he said. “Well, now consider whether you would not have done even better still if you had chosen something else besides gold and bronze.” “What else?” “Justice, Gyges, and injustice. For if you had chosen injustice, you would soon have had everything and swept the whole world clean, and you would have lived in luxury and pleasure all your life long. But if you had chosen justice, you would have suffered many hardships, and most of them without reward. Don’t you think that you would have done better to choose injustice?” “By heaven, yes!” “And yet, as it happens, you chose the gold.” “That’s true,” he said, “for I thought that I could hide it more easily.” “Very well, then,” I said, “you will agree that if you had taken injustice, you would have taken the gold too.” “Of course,” he said. “Do you see, then,” I said, “that in every way you would have done better to choose injustice? +Diegetic time: A few minutes" In the storm he saw an opening in the earth and went down into it, where he found a hollow brazen horse. When he had got inside the horse, he covered up the opening with mud and grass, and went to the city. The next day the king summoned the people of his council and said: “Men of Athens, I have a secret that I must tell you. Last night, when we were at supper, a man came to me from Thebes, and told me that he was one of the men who had been sent by Candaules against Gyges the shepherd; and how Gyges had killed them all and escaped himself. “He said that Gyges had stolen one of their coats of mail, and put it on; and, having done this, he changed his face and shape, and so made his way out of the place where they were shut up. He also said that Gyges had gone back to Lydia, and after some time became prime minister of King Candaules, who died shortly afterwards. After that Gyges married the queen, and reigned in her stead.” At these words there rose up among the Athenians many different opinions. Some believed that the man who told the story was lying; others thought that he was telling the truth; but most of them agreed that if what he said was true, the king was justified in doing what he had done. For they thought that it would be right for any man to kill another, if he could do so safely, who had the power to rob him of his wife. 19 19 "Now, if we are to form a real judgment of the life of the just andunjust, we must isolate them; there is no other way; and how is theisolation to be effected? I answer: Let the unjust man be entirelyunjust, and the just man entirely just; nothing is to be taken awayfrom either of them, and both are to be perfectly furnished for thework of their respective lives. First, let the unjust be like otherdistinguished masters of craft; like the skilful pilot or physician,who knows intuitively his own powers and keeps within their limits,and who, if he fails at any point, is able to recover himself. Solet the unjust make his unjust attempts in the right way, and liehidden if he means to be great in his injustice (he who is found outis nobody): for the highest reach of injustice is: to be deemed justwhen you are not. Therefore I say that in the perfectly unjust manwe must assume the most perfect injustice; there is to be no deduction,but we must allow him, while doing the most unjust acts, to have acquiredthe greatest reputation for justice. If he have taken a false stephe must be able to recover himself; he must be one who can speak witheffect, if any of his deeds come to light, and who can force his waywhere force is required his courage and strength, and command of moneyand friends. And at his side let us place the just man in his noblenessand simplicity, wishing, as Aeschylus says, to be and not to seemgood. There must be no seeming, for if he seem to be just he willbe honoured and rewarded, and then we shall not know whether he isjust for the sake of justice or for the sake of honours and rewards;therefore, let him be clothed in justice only, and have no other covering;and he must be imagined in a state of life the opposite of the former.Let him be the best of men, and let him be thought the worst; thenhe will have been put to the proof; and we shall see whether he willbe affected by the fear of infamy and its consequences. And let himcontinue thus to the hour of death; being just and seeming to be unjust.When both have reached the uttermost extreme, the one of justice andthe other of injustice, let judgment be given which of them is thehappier of the two. Socrates - GLAUCON Heavens! my dear Glaucon, I said, how energetically you polish themup for the decision, first one and then the other, as if they weretwo statues. @@ -477,15 +477,15 @@ I was going to say something in answer to Glaucon, when Adeimantus,his brother, Why, what else is there? I answered. The strongest point of all has not been even mentioned, he replied." "Summary: The text discusses the concept of justice and injustice, comparing the lives of a just and unjust person. Trope: The contrast between justice and injustice Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion and comparison -Enunciation: Dialogue between Socrates and Glaucon -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, Glaucon, Adeimantus -Time setting: Contemporary" "Ach, die Wahrheit! Die Wahrheit ist doch doch immer die Wahrheit?"""" Das ist sie"", sagte Socrates, ""aber ich habe keine Lust zu streiten. Wenn du mir aber weiter sagen willst, was in der Gerechtigkeit und dem Ungerechten liegt, so kann ich dich hren."""" Ich will es dir sagen, da du's nicht vergessen wirst."" Und ich will dich darum bitten, wenn du mich richtig verstanden hast, es mir wiederholen, damit ich es auch ganz gut kenne."" Nun gut"", sagte Glaukon, ""der gerechte Mann im Staate oder in der Stadt, bei denen wir jetzt gerade davon reden, hat zu seinen Freunden ein gutes Verhltnis, weil er ihnen schadet und ihnen nimmermehr etwas zuleide tut, er beschttet sie, und sie sind von ihm abhngig; sein Freund dagegen wird ihn oft durch Geld oder andere Dinge bel aus, und er ist von ihm abhngig. Das ist es also, was gerecht und ungerecht ist. Denn das Unrecht hat sich's wohl in den Kopf gesetzt, dem Recht zu schaden, wie das berma der Macht in den Krieg gegen die Schwche geht."""" Das ist ja eine rechte Geschichte!"" rief Socrates, ""wenn der Rechte dem Unrechten schadet, so mu er doch immer recht behalten, denn wenn er sonst unrecht wird, so wird er nur sein eigenes Unrecht bestrafen und das ist nicht recht. Aber nun, Adeimantus,"""" fuhr er fort, """"wie steht's mit der Gerechtigkeit, die der Staat als solche besitzt?"""" Der ist er schon hergekommen"", fiel Glaukon ein. Was fr einen guten Rat gibst du da heraus! So knnen wir uns vllig irren, wenn wir uns nicht merken, woher wir den guten Rat erhalten haben. Aber nun, Adeimantus, kannst du mir sagen, wie es um die Gerechtigkeit des Staatsbestehens steht?"""" Er kann's"", warf Glaukon ein, ""aber ich glaube, du magst's ihm auf eigene Faust nachspinnen."""" Dann rate ich dir"", sagte Socrates, ""dich an die Herakleia zu wenden, wo man so leicht nicht vorbeikommt."""" Wie das?"" fragte Glaukon. Du bist doch schon einmal dort gewesen, wie ich wei."" Ja, einmal, und ich weiß nicht, ob ich's noch einmal darauf versuchen werde."" Sei nur ruhig, das wrde dir vielleicht nicht gefallen; aber ich sage dir, da ich es selbst nicht gerne mache. Denn ich will dir gestehen, da ich mich dort so zierlich befinde, da ich mich zuweilen frchte, mich mit einem Gesicht ungeschickter anzustellen, als jemals ein Toter oder ein Affe. Aber nun hre nur, wie es um die Gerechtigkeit des Staates bestellt ist. Der gerechte Staat ist ein edler Herrscher, wie wir sagten, der freilich der Natur entsprechend, nicht allen Menschen eine vollkommene Gerechtigkeit zuschreibt, sondern nur denen, die fr ihren Stand ebenso natrliche Begabungen haben, als die andern fr ihre; die aber sind welche, deren Denken und Handeln nicht in dem Grunde getrbt ist, und die daher in ihrem Beruf ein jeder unter der Fhrung der Vernunft handelt. Die andere Klasse, welche nicht geboren ist, um auf der Spitze zu stehen, sondern um in einer gehorsamen Stellung demjenigen zu dienen, der den ersten Platz innehat, diese muss die Vernunft nicht besitzen, weil sie nicht dazu geboren ist. " +Time setting: 1950s" "Then the unjust man will have been left a ruined man, and he'll realize that all his life long he's been trying to get something for nothing. He'll also be liable to punishment in this world, and there'll be no end of people who'll come at him with their tongues out; and if he kills them they'll accuse him of murder and the accusers will be believed because they're dead, whereas he's alive. When he tries to escape from this situation by running away, he'll find it impossible because he'll have no friends to help him, and all men will combine against him as an enemy since he tried to cheat them of their property. And when he gets old and is no longer able to do anything, he'll be alone and desolate and completely wretched; and so, Glaucon, he'll be justly punished by being deprived of everything including even the hope of happiness in another world. So now you've got justice and injustice both painted in their true colors, Socrates. Which of the two would you rather have?"""" I'm afraid,"" said Socrates, ""that you've made your choice too quickly, Glaucon."""" But isn't it plain enough?"" he asked. ""Wouldn't you choose to have the character of the just man rather than that of the unjust man?"" Yes, I'd certainly choose the character of the just man."" Would you really choose the life of the just man or would you rather live like the unjust man and have no one notice what you're up to?"""" He didn't know how to answer that, so he kept quiet. So then Adeimantus came to his rescue and said: """"Socrates, you seem to me to be saying something rather odd. You're telling us that the just man won't be able to live a better life than the unjust man, but only a quieter one, and that the just life won't be more pleasant either, but only less painful. If this is so, why on earth should anyone want to be just rather than unjust?"""" It seems to me, Adeimantus, that you're quite right. The life of the just man is less pleasant than that of the unjust man, but it's also less painful. If someone had told me that before, I'd have believed it easily enough, but I wouldn't have believed that justice was better than injustice. If I were told the same thing today, I'd believe it, but only if someone else had persuaded me first that the just man is happier than the unjust man."""" " 20 20 "Well, then, according to the proverb, 'Let brother help brother' --ifhe fails in any part do you assist him; although I must confess thatGlaucon has already said quite enough to lay me in the dust, and takefrom me the power of helping justice. Adeimantus Nonsense, he replied. But let me add something more: There is anotherside to Glaucon's argument about the praise and censure of justiceand injustice, which is equally required in order to bring out whatI believe to be his meaning. Parents and tutors are always tellingtheir sons and their wards that they are to be just; but why? notfor the sake of justice, but for the sake of character and reputation;in the hope of obtaining for him who is reputed just some of thoseoffices, marriages, and the like which Glaucon has enumerated amongthe advantages accruing to the unjust from the reputation of justice.More, however, is made of appearances by this class of persons thanby the others; for they throw in the good opinion of the gods, andwill tell you of a shower of benefits which the heavens, as they say,rain upon the pious; and this accords with the testimony of the nobleHesiod and Homer, the first of whom says, that the gods make the oaksof the just-- @@ -493,42 +493,42 @@ To hear acorns at their summit, and bees I the middle; And the sheep the bowed d As the fame of some blameless king who, like a god, Maintains justice to whom the black earth brings forth Wheat and barley, whose trees are bowed with fruit, And his sheep never fail to bear, and the sea gives him fish. Stillgrander are the gifts of heaven which Musaeus and his son vouchsafeto the just; they take them down into the world below, where theyhave the saints lying on couches at a feast, everlastingly drunk,crowned with garlands; their idea seems to be that an immortalityof drunkenness is the highest meed of virtue. Some extend their rewardsyet further; the posterity, as they say, of the faithful and justshall survive to the third and fourth generation. This is the stylein which they praise justice. But about the wicked there is anotherstrain; they bury them in a slough in Hades, and make them carry waterin a sieve; also while they are yet living they bring them to infamy,and inflict upon them the punishments which Glaucon described as theportion of the just who are reputed to be unjust; nothing else doestheir invention supply. Such is their manner of praising the one andcensuring the other. Once more, Socrates, I will ask you to consider another way of speakingabout justice and injustice, which is not confined to the poets, butis found in prose writers. The universal voice of mankind is alwaysdeclaring that justice and virtue are honourable, but grievous andtoilsome; and that the pleasures of vice and injustice are easy ofattainment, and are only censured by law and opinion. They say alsothat honesty is for the most part less profitable than dishonesty;and they are quite ready to call wicked men happy, and to honour themboth in public and private when they are rich or in any other wayinfluential, while they despise and overlook those who may be weakand poor, even though acknowledging them to be better than the others.But most extraordinary of all is their mode of speaking about virtueand the gods: they say that the gods apportion calamity and miseryto many good men, and good and happiness to the wicked. And mendicantprophets go to rich men's doors and persuade them that they have apower committed to them by the gods of making an atonement for a man'sown or his ancestor's sins by sacrifices or charms, with rejoicingsand feasts; and they promise to harm an enemy, whether just or unjust,at a small cost; with magic arts and incantations binding heaven,as they say, to execute their will. And the poets are the authoritiesto whom they appeal, now smoothing the path of vice with the wordsof Hesiod; --" "Summary: The text discusses the perception of justice and injustice in society, highlighting the praise and censure of both concepts. Narrative arc: Philosophical argument -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical discussion -Literary movement: Plato's philosophy -Active character: Glaucon, Adeimantus, Socrates" Adeimantus. Nun, ich will's hoffen. Glaukon. Und ich auch! Socrates. Ja, mein Freund, wir wollen beide es hoffen; denn das Recht ist weit und breit nicht nur in unserer Stadt, sondern auch in der ganzen Welt hoch gelobt. Denn wer ein Unrecht tut, wird ungesetzt gesetzt und dem Tode verfallen, und wer ein Recht tut, wird belohnt und gefeiert. Adeimantus. So mu man sagen, da die meisten den Eindruck haben, wie es scheint, da sich Gerechtigkeit und Ungerechtigkeit ganz gegensinnig verhalten. Socrates. Das ist nicht wunderbar; denn so giebt's ja auch viele Menschen, die gegensinnig sind. Adeimantus. Das hab' ich noch nie gehrt. Socrates. Das macht nichts, aber du wirst's schon hren. Denn ich werde dir sogleich erzählen, wie die Groten in der Mythologie von der Gerechtigkeit und Ungerechtigkeit reden. Sie behaupten, sie seien Gegensatze, und doch wollen sie dennoch, da ihre Entstehung aus einem selben Ursache komme. So heisst es wenigstens bei den Alten, und unter uns mu's wohl gleich sein. Du verstehst mich? Adeimantus. Aber sehr gut. Socrates. Gut! Nun so la uns den Anfang machen. Wenn einer sagt, da die Gerechtigkeit gut sei und die Ungerechtigkeit schlecht, da meint er doch nicht, da das gute Ding, wenn es im Menschen entsteht, von ihm selbst hervorgebracht wird, oder da das schlechte Ding, wenn es aufkommt, aus seiner eigenen Natur entstanden. Adeimantus. Nein, das glaube ich nicht. Socrates. Und sollt' er auch etwas anderes meinen? Adeimantus. Nicht, was ich hre. Socrates. So mu er doch notwendig annehmen, da sie aus einem einzigen Ursache hervorgegangen sind. Adeimantus. Er mu. Socrates. Und wenn nun einmal diese beiden Dinge, Gerechtigkeit und Ungerechtigkeit, aus einem einzigen Ursache entstanden sind, so kann kein Mensch wohl einen bessern Beweis fr ihre Gegensinnigkeit geben als eben diese Entstehung aus einem einzigen Ursache. Adeimantus. Das hat groes Gewicht. Socrates. O Freund, warum machst du ein solches Gesicht, als ob du's nicht verstehest? Adeimantus. Ich verstehe dich nicht, sonst wr' es mir viel lieber. Socrates. Sprich weiter. Adeimantus. Ich sprech', da ich dich nicht verstehe, und la dich doch fortfahren. Socrates. Es gibt eine Seele, Adeimantus, die sich um die Leibeskrfte kmmmt, und diese mu immer nach und nach durch Hunger, Durst, Schlaf, Wachheit, Hitze, Khlte, Schmerz und Wonnen herumschlagen. Adeimantus. Das ist wahr. Socrates. +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: Glaucon, Adeimantus, Socrates" "Sehr leicht ist es, da die Leute von der Gerechtigkeit und Ungerechtigkeit ein falsches Bild haben. Sie meinen, wenn jemand einen Mann tten oder ihm Schaden zufgen will, so ist das ungerecht; aber wenn sie selbst ihr Leben in Gefahr bringen und ihre Freiheit und ihr Gut opfern mssen, dann heisst das gerecht. Und wenn einer sich vor einem bessern Mann hlt als er ist und ihn nicht neckt und nicht schndet und ihm nicht vor die Fusten tritt, so ist das gerecht; aber wenn einer etwas Gutes von den Seinen nimmt, oder wenn er, ohne Ursache, schlechte Worte mit ihnen redet, oder wenn er schlechtes Fleisch eintut, oder wenn er einem anderen eine Stellung gibt, die ihm nicht gebhrt, so ist das ungerecht."""" 20. Wenn sie nun auch so recht anfangen zu reden, so wundern wir uns wohl nicht, da sie in solcher Weise von Recht und Unrecht urteilen. Denn wie kann ein unkluger Mensch, der nur beisammenliegt, Recht und Unrecht unterscheiden? Nun, Freund Adeimantus, soll Glaukon nun weiter ausreden, oder du?"""" 21. Ich,"""" sagte Adeimantus, """"werde alles sagen, was mir vorkommt, und ich glaube, es wird nicht leicht mehr sein, denn mein Bruder hat schon viel gesprochen."""" So sei es!"" rief Socrates lachend. ""Und du wirst dich in meiner Lehre nicht stehlen lassen, sondern aussprechen, was du fr dich allein hervorgebracht hast."""" Also,"" sagte Adeimantus, ""ich meine folgendes: Die Leute halten es fr ungerecht, wenn man ihnen weh tut, und werden durch Schmerz, Tod, Gefangenschaft und alle Art von Ungemach verwnscht. Aber wenn sie ihrerseits einen Menschen tten oder ihm Schaden zufgen, dann sind sie damit zufrieden, und finden, da es gerecht sei. Hren Sie mich nur ruhig an! Ist das nicht so? Nehmen Sie an, da ein armer Teufel, der auf dem Lande lebt, im Auslande ein groes Vermgen gemacht hat; nun kommt er nach Hause, um unter seinen Verwandten zu leben. In welcher Stadt er auch immer ankommt, so mu er unbedingt daran gedacht haben, wie er seine Erbschaft und seine Zeit anstellen werde; denn in der Regel ist er noch jung, und sobald er erst im eigenen Lande angekommen ist, sucht er sich Freunde, Schwager, Neffen, Vetter und Cousinen, und welche vielleicht gar keine Verwandten von ihm sind, aber doch gute Freunde seines Geldes werden wollen. Dann sitzt er nieder und schreibt jedem von ihnen eine Summe von drei oder vier Talenten zu, und sagt: Ihr seid meine Verwandten, und ich liebe euch, und habt Mitleid mit mir und helft mir!"""" Dann geht er, weil er nicht gelernt hat, was Recht und Unrecht sind, von Haus zu Haus, und verteilte reichlich das Geld, das er besitzt, nicht nur unter seine Verwandten, sondern auch unter die Fremden, die sich als solche ausgeben. Nun, Freund Glaukon,"""" sagte Adeimantus, """"ist das gerecht oder ungerecht?"""" Das wrde ich nicht gerade behaupten,"""" sagte Glaukon, """"da es gerecht sei."""" Aber es ist nicht ungerecht?"" sagte Adeimantus. " 21 21 "Vice may be had in abundance without trouble; the way is smooth andher dwelling-place is near. But before virtue the gods have set toil,and a tedious and uphill road: then citing Homer as a witness thatthe gods may be influenced by men; for he also says: The gods, too, may he turned from their purpose; and men pray to themand avert their wrath by sacrifices and soothing entreaties, and bylibations and the odour of fat, when they have sinned and transgressed.And they produce a host of books written by Musaeus and Orpheus, whowere children of the Moon and the Muses --that is what they say --accordingto which they perform their ritual, and persuade not only individuals,but whole cities, that expiations and atonements for sin may be madeby sacrifices and amusements which fill a vacant hour, and are equallyat the service of the living and the dead; the latter sort they callmysteries, and they redeem us from the pains of hell, but if we neglectthem no one knows what awaits us. He proceeded: And now when the young hear all this said about virtueand vice, and the way in which gods and men regard them, how are theirminds likely to be affected, my dear Socrates, --those of them, Imean, who are quickwitted, and, like bees on the wing, light on everyflower, and from all that they hear are prone to draw conclusionsas to what manner of persons they should be and in what way they shouldwalk if they would make the best of life? Probably the youth willsay to himself in the words of Pindar-- Can I by justice or by crooked ways of deceit ascend a loftier towerwhich may he a fortress to me all my days? For what men say is that,if I am really just and am not also thought just profit there is none,but the pain and loss on the other hand are unmistakable. But if,though unjust, I acquire the reputation of justice, a heavenly lifeis promised to me. Since then, as philosophers prove, appearance tyrannizesover truth and is lord of happiness, to appearance I must devote myself.I will describe around me a picture and shadow of virtue to be thevestibule and exterior of my house; behind I will trail the subtleand crafty fox, as Archilochus, greatest of sages, recommends. ButI hear some one exclaiming that the concealment of wickedness is oftendifficult; to which I answer, Nothing great is easy. Nevertheless,the argument indicates this, if we would be happy, to be the pathalong which we should proceed. With a view to concealment we willestablish secret brotherhoods and political clubs. And there are professorsof rhetoric who teach the art of persuading courts and assemblies;and so, partly by persuasion and partly by force, I shall make unlawfulgains and not be punished. Still I hear a voice saying that the godscannot be deceived, neither can they be compelled. But what if thereare no gods? or, suppose them to have no care of human things --whyin either case should we mind about concealment? And even if thereare gods, and they do care about us, yet we know of them only fromtradition and the genealogies of the poets; and these are the verypersons who say that they may be influenced and turned by 'sacrificesand soothing entreaties and by offerings.' Let us be consistent then,and believe both or neither. If the poets speak truly, why then wehad better be unjust, and offer of the fruits of injustice; for ifwe are just, although we may escape the vengeance of heaven, we shalllose the gains of injustice; but, if we are unjust, we shall keepthe gains, and by our sinning and praying, and praying and sinning,the gods will be propitiated, and we shall not be punished. 'But thereis a world below in which either we or our posterity will suffer forour unjust deeds.' Yes, my friend, will be the reflection, but thereare mysteries and atoning deities, and these have great power. Thatis what mighty cities declare; and the children of the gods, who weretheir poets and prophets, bear a like testimony." "Summary: The text discusses the influence of gods and the pursuit of virtue and vice. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical argument -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates Quoted work: Homer, Pindar, Archilochus -Time setting: Contemporary" If the gods are friends of men, they will help them to be virtuous and avoid vice; if they are enemies, they will make them base and wicked. Now my own view is that they are the friends of good men and the enemies of bad men; but I have no proof of this except the testimonies of Homer and Hesiod, who throughout represent the gods as liking the good and hating the bad. Why do you not prove your doctrine by arguments instead of relying on poets?” “I have often tried,” he said, “to find an argument which would satisfy myself, and when I fail I turn to other things, for want of the power to prove to you that the gods are our friends.” And I thought that he spoke very sensibly, reflecting that any argument about goodness or badness must be long and laborious, and having small hopes of success at my hands. Then I said: “Suppose we leave the question of gods and devils, whether they exist or not, and ask, What is virtue?—that will be quite as much to our purpose.” “By all means,” he said; “let us do as you suggest.” “Well then,” I said, “virtue may be defined as the faculty of acquiring wealth without labour.” “You are making fun of me, Socrates.” “Why, how do you mean?” I asked. “Do I not seem to you to be making game of virtue, when I define it as the faculty of acquiring wealth without labour?” “Yes,” he said, “there is a good deal in that.” “And now let us consider how virtue can be acquired,” said I. “Can we say that we learn nothing from the wise?” “Certainly not.” “Then if wisdom were virtue, you would be able to acquire wisdom from the wise.” “True.” “But surely the rich are also thought wise by most people.” “Yes.” “Then the rich, too, will make you rich if you associate with them.” “Clearly.” “But the wealthy are also reputed noble.” “They are.” “Then if nobility is virtue, you will be made noble, if you keep their company.” “Of course.” “The brave, too, are said to be worthy of praise.” “They are.” “Then if you keep their company you will become brave.” “Certainly.” “The just, too, are said to be good.” “They are.” “Then if you keep their company you will be made just.” “That is clear enough.” “Then if there were one single virtue, what would be more natural than to acquire it from those who have it? But tell me, are not those who know anything good at all?” “Assuredly.” “And are not the wise and good among our neighbours the best persons from whom we can get wisdom and goodness?” “Undeniably.” “Then if there were one single virtue, we should be very wrong not to go to our neighbours for it.” “Very right indeed.” “But there are many virtues, are there not?” “Yes, many.” +Time setting: 1950s" "Suppose the gods don't interfere with their own lives?"""" Socrates said: """"I'll tell you a story. A man was riding in a boat on a big lake, and it got very dark. He could hear the water lapping at the sides of the boat, but he couldn't see anything except for some fireflies on the water. Suddenly he felt something big swimming around under the boat. He knew it must be a sea monster because it made the boat rock up and down. The man started to pray to Zeus to save him from the monster. But then he thought, 'What's the use praying to Zeus when I'm not even sure he exists? Maybe he does, maybe he doesn't.' So he prayed to Poseidon instead, but he didn't feel any better because he wasn't sure Poseidon existed either. Then he prayed to Amphitrite, and after that to every god he could remember. Finally he started praying to all the gods together. Still the monster kept swimming around under the boat. At last he said to himself, 'Maybe if I know which god is responsible for this, I can make him stop it.' And he began to curse each god in turn for doing it, and at last he cursed them all."""" Socrates said: """"Well?"" What happened?"" Well,"" said the narrator, ""the next thing the man knew he was safe on shore."" Why?"" Because the monster had been frightened by the noise and gone away."" Very interesting,"" said Socrates. ""Now suppose there are gods who do nothing unless they're insulted?"""" Good point,"" said the narrator. ""Then if we want good things to happen, we should try to keep them happy by flattering them. For instance, if we pray to Zeus to give us what we want, he might get angry and give us the opposite."""" If he exists."" That too,"" said the narrator. ""But suppose he does exist, wouldn't he like it if people flattered him?"""" Of course he would. Especially if he's vain like most people who live in Hollywood. In fact, sometimes I think he likes flattery so much he gives us what we want just to hear us thank him for it."""" You mean he's more interested in hearing his praises sung than in making people happy?"" Exactly. And if you have trouble getting what you want, you can always bribe him with sacrifices or offerings."""" Then why don't people do that?"" They do,"" said the narrator. ""Every time they light a cigarette they're bribing Zeus to let them smoke, and every time they take a drink they're bribing him to let them drink. But it's hard to bribe him into letting people drive over fifty miles an hour, or play poker, or shoot dice, or go to bed with their own wives."""" Socrates nodded. " 22 22 "On what principle, then, shall we any longer choose justice ratherthan the worst injustice? when, if we only unite the latter with adeceitful regard to appearances, we shall fare to our mind both withgods and men, in life and after death, as the most numerous and thehighest authorities tell us. Knowing all this, Socrates, how can aman who has any superiority of mind or person or rank or wealth, bewilling to honour justice; or indeed to refrain from laughing whenhe hears justice praised? And even if there should be some one whois able to disprove the truth of my words, and who is satisfied thatjustice is best, still he is not angry with the unjust, but is veryready to forgive them, because he also knows that men are not justof their own free will; unless, peradventure, there be some one whomthe divinity within him may have inspired with a hatred of injustice,or who has attained knowledge of the truth --but no other man. Heonly blames injustice who, owing to cowardice or age or some weakness,has not the power of being unjust. And this is proved by the factthat when he obtains the power, he immediately becomes unjust as faras he can be. The cause of all this, Socrates, was indicated by us at the beginningof the argument, when my brother and I told you how astonished wewere to find that of all the professing panegyrists of justice --beginningwith the ancient heroes of whom any memorial has been preserved tous, and ending with the men of our own time --no one has ever blamedinjustice or praised justice except with a view to the glories, honours,and benefits which flow from them. No one has ever adequately describedeither in verse or prose the true essential nature of either of themabiding in the soul, and invisible to any human or divine eye; orshown that of all the things of a man's soul which he has within him,justice is the greatest good, and injustice the greatest evil. Hadthis been the universal strain, had you sought to persuade us of thisfrom our youth upwards, we should not have been on the watch to keepone another from doing wrong, but every one would have been his ownwatchman, because afraid, if he did wrong, of harbouring in himselfthe greatest of evils. I dare say that Thrasymachus and others wouldseriously hold the language which I have been merely repeating, andwords even stronger than these about justice and injustice, grossly,as I conceive, perverting their true nature. But I speak in this vehementmanner, as I must frankly confess to you, because I want to hear fromyou the opposite side; and I would ask you to show not only the superioritywhich justice has over injustice, but what effect they have on thepossessor of them which makes the one to be a good and the other anevil to him. And please, as Glaucon requested of you, to exclude reputations;for unless you take away from each of them his true reputation andadd on the false, we shall say that you do not praise justice, butthe appearance of it; we shall think that you are only exhorting usto keep injustice dark, and that you really agree with Thrasymachusin thinking that justice is another's good and the interest of thestronger, and that injustice is a man's own profit and interest, thoughinjurious to the weaker. Now as you have admitted that justice isone of that highest class of goods which are desired indeed for theirresults, but in a far greater degree for their own sakes --like sightor hearing or knowledge or health, or any other real and natural andnot merely conventional good --I would ask you in your praise of justiceto regard one point only: I mean the essential good and evil whichjustice and injustice work in the possessors of them. Let others praisejustice and censure injustice, magnifying the rewards and honoursof the one and abusing the other; that is a manner of arguing which,coming from them, I am ready to tolerate, but from you who have spentyour whole life in the consideration of this question, unless I hearthe contrary from your own lips, I expect something better. And therefore,I say, not only prove to us that justice is better than injustice,but show what they either of them do to the possessor of them, whichmakes the one to be a good and the other an evil, whether seen orunseen by gods and men. Socrates - ADEIMANTUS" "Summary: The text explores the nature of justice and injustice, questioning why people choose justice over injustice. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog between Socrates and Adeimantus -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical argument -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, Adeimantus -Quoted character: Thrasymachus" "Suppose that we were to ask him, 'Why do you choose injustice?' and he replied, 'I like it,' what should we say to him?"""" We should say that he was very odd,"" said Adeimantus, ""if that was his reason."""" Very odd, indeed,"" said Socrates, ""and if so, we must discipline him in some way. Let us assume, then, that we have discovered a man who likes injustice for the sake of injustice. What shall we say to him next?"""" We might tell him,"" said Adeimantus, ""that he is only deceiving himself; that no one likes injustice as such."""" That may be so,"" replied Socrates, ""but why should we argue about it? He will not understand us anyhow. The question is whether he would prefer to live among men who are unjust and dishonourable rather than among just and honourable men. Suppose we put it to him in this way: 'Thrasymachus, would you rather live with honest men or with rogues?'"" If you please,"" said Thrasymachus. Then what answer shall we make?"" I think I can guess,"" said Polemarchus. ""He would say, of course, that he would rather live with rogues."""" Why, my excellent friend,"" said Socrates, ""you seem to be coming round to the views of Thrasymachus already. But see if you can't find another argument against him; for justice is a fine thing, and ought to be vindicated on every ground. Now suppose that there were two men, one of whom was a physician, and the other an experienced soldier, and they were asked which of them would be better able to cure any disease, they would probably both agree that the physician would. Next suppose that the same persons were asked which of them would be better able to fight with another man, and to hit or escape from a blow, they would certainly say that it was the soldier. And if they were asked whether the physician would not be beaten by the stronger man, and suffer if he fought with him, both of them would say that he would. Suppose now,"""" he continued, """"we were to carry our illustration a step further and ask them whether they thought that the physician ought to go and fight for the salvation of the State when the State sent for him, or whether he ought to take no notice of the summons and remain at home and mind his own business."""" They would say that he ought to go."" And suppose that we carried the illustration still further and asked them whether the physician, when he had gone to the aid of the State, ought to use all the means of saving it which he knew, or whether he ought to keep some of them secret and only use those which he thought sufficient for the purpose, and thus perhaps fail to save the State when he might have done so?"""" Clearly,"" said Polemarchus, ""he ought to use every means at his command in order to save it."""" " +Quoted character: Thrasymachus" """""And what do we mean by justice?"""" I said. """"That is indeed a question worth considering."""" And if we can once ascertain the nature of justice, we shall also see why injustice, being justice's opposite, is always blameable, as it evidently is; for having seen the good no man will choose the bad."" Very true,"" he replied. ""Let us, then, consider which has most power to bring about happiness, whether justice or injustice."" I think that they are both right and both wrong,"" I said; ""right when they are directed towards their proper ends; wrong when they miss their mark."""" Was there anything else?"" he asked. Yes,"" I answered; ""I think that the one which most of all tends to produce happiness is justice, because it makes men who live together in society practically friends, and friends desire to benefit one another and do each other good actions."" You mean,"" he said, ""that the just man is profitable to his friend?"" Certainly,"" I replied. Then justice is not only desirable in itself but profitable to the individual."" That is my view,"" I said. And surely, Thrasymachus, nothing can be really and absolutely good which is on every occasion both hurtful and harmful."" True."" Then don't say that I call injustice better than justice because I find that some one may gain more evil from justice than good. " 23 23 "I had always admired the genius of Glaucon and Adeimantus, but onhearing these words I was quite delighted, and said: Sons of an illustriousfather, that was not a bad beginning of the Elegiac verses which theadmirer of Glaucon made in honour of you after you had distinguishedyourselves at the battle of Megara:-- 'Sons of Ariston,' he sang, 'divine offspring of an illustrious hero.'The epithet is very appropriate, for there is something truly divinein being able to argue as you have done for the superiority of injustice,and remaining unconvinced by your own arguments. And I do believethat you are not convinced --this I infer from your general character,for had I judged only from your speeches I should have mistrustedyou. But now, the greater my confidence in you, the greater is mydifficulty in knowing what to say. For I am in a strait between two;on the one hand I feel that I am unequal to the task; and my inabilityis brought home to me by the fact that you were not satisfied withthe answer which I made to Thrasymachus, proving, as I thought, thesuperiority which justice has over injustice. And yet I cannot refuseto help, while breath and speech remain to me; I am afraid that therewould be an impiety in being present when justice is evil spoken ofand not lifting up a hand in her defence. And therefore I had bestgive such help as I can. Glaucon and the rest entreated me by all means not to let the questiondrop, but to proceed in the investigation. They wanted to arrive atthe truth, first, about the nature of justice and injustice, and secondly,about their relative advantages. I told them, what I --really thought,that the enquiry would be of a serious nature, and would require verygood eyes. Seeing then, I said, that we are no great wits, I thinkthat we had better adopt a method which I may illustrate thus; supposethat a short-sighted person had been asked by some one to read smallletters from a distance; and it occurred to some one else that theymight be found in another place which was larger and in which theletters were larger --if they were the same and he could read thelarger letters first, and then proceed to the lesser --this wouldhave been thought a rare piece of good fortune. @@ -543,17 +543,17 @@ A State, I said, arises, as I conceive, out of the needs of mankind;no one is se There can I be no other. Then, as we have many wants, and many persons are needed to supplythem, one takes a helper for one purpose and another for another;and when these partners and helpers are gathered together in one habitationthe body of inhabitants is termed a State. True, he said. And they exchange with one another, and one gives, and another receives,under the idea that the exchange will be for their good." "Summary: The narrator is impressed by the arguments of Glaucon and Adeimantus, but hesitates to join their discussion due to his own lack of skill. The others encourage him to continue, and they decide to investigate the nature of justice and injustice in both the State and the individual. Narrative arc: Introduction of characters and setting up the investigation -Enunciation: First-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonism +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Glaucon, Adeimantus Quoted character: Thrasymachus -Time setting: Contemporary -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "It's the greatest thing I ever heard of. The way they wiped out that lot! It was hardboiled, all right. But what gets me is how they did it. And then that argument about the State! When Glaucon started in with his line about the State being the soul of society, and Adeimantus backed him up with that stuff about how the individual isn't anything except he's got a place in the social structure, well!"""" He wiped his forehead with the back of his hand. """"I tell you I sat there just as limp as a rag! Well,"""" he said, """"what are we waiting for? Let's go on with this thing!"""" I felt myself beginning to warm up a little at last. There was something in the way those two guys had put their arguments across that impressed me. No doubt about it. They could handle themselves, all right. For a moment I began to think that maybe I wasn't such a dead loss after all. I mean, if I could only get into the swing of it. It was like that time I went in for diving when I was a kid."""" The others looked at me encouragingly. Adeimantus took the lead again. """"Come on, Thrasymachus,"""" he said. """"Let's have more of your ideas. Tell us why justice is injustice."""" I hesitated. I didn't like the idea of getting into the argument again. I knew darn well I wasn't up to it. I'd never been any good at talking like that. But the others kept after me until finally I gave in. All right,"" I said, ""here goes!"" CHAPTER 4 There was an ominous silence while I gathered my wits together and started to speak. You know, fellows,"" I said, ""all this talk about Justice and Injustice makes me feel pretty raw. Why? Because I know darn well I'm not any too honest myself."""" You aren't?"" said Socrates. ""What do you mean by that?"" Oh, nothing much. It's just that sometimes I don't behave quite square. I mean, when I've got a chance to make a buck and nobody knows about it, I take it."""" So you're not honest,"" said Socrates. ""You steal. Is that it?"""" Yeah,"" I said, ""that's it."" Glaucon spoke up. """"But stealing's a crime, isn't it?"""" Sure,"" I said, ""stealing's a crime. I know it is. But that doesn't stop me from doing it. If I can get away with it, I'll do it every time."""" That's very interesting,"" said Socrates. ""And you say you're not honest yourself?"""" Sure,"" I said, ""I ain't honest. Never was."" Then Glaucon looked at me and said: """"Tell us some of the things you've stolen."""" " +Time setting: 1950s +Diegetic time: A few minutes" And Glaucon said: ‘We have certainly done our best, Socrates, and we are the losers by the result. Nevertheless the discussion has been a fine thing. I believe that we should obey Thrasymachus and his friends when they bid us follow in their tracks; for when men are following, you may be sure that there is a track somewhere or other.’ ‘And where,’ he said, ‘could we find a better track than with one who is himself a king? ’ ‘There can be no better,’ I replied; ‘but where, then, is the track which he follows, or rather was following at that time? ’ ‘Why, the way of which we were speaking, namely, the just and noble life.’ ‘That seems likely,’ he said. ‘Then let us go back to the word itself, and begin afresh, like winners at dice who must admit that they have lost, and ask ourselves whether there is such a thing as justice, and if so, what it is; and in like manner honour, and temperature, and courage, and magnificence, and their opposites. For we did not seem to agree about what these things are.’ ‘That is true,’ he said. ‘Where is our answer to Thrasymachus’ question—“Whether justice is a good thing for a man to have”? ’ ‘He was always asking the same question,’ I said—and I do not know how to answer him, except by saying the very words which he used: “Yes, by God,” and therefore, as I am sure that you will acknowledge, he will be unable to refute me.’ ‘No indeed,’ he said; ‘but I should like you to explain to me, Socrates, why justice has this virtue, and why injustice is evil, even though recommended by Thrasymachus.’ ‘I too,’ I said, ‘should very much like to know.’ ‘What a strange scene has been enacted!’ said Polemarchus. ‘Thrasymachus seemed to make a splendid beginning. He had plenty of material to work upon, and yet we drove him from his position. Had we known how, I suspect that we might have driven many another out of other positions.’ ‘That is very likely,’ I said; ‘but I daresay that he would have been equally clever in turning the tables on us, if he had had the chance.’ ‘There was something rather splendid about his fury,’ I said; ‘but the fury of Polemarchus and Adeimantus was even more terrible. Why, they took their own lives in their hands, and really laid hold of Thrasymachus and forced him against his will to answer questions which he did not want to answer; for he would have made away with us and our questions long ago, had he been able.’ ‘That’s quite true,’ he said; ‘but still their fervour was not without effect.’ ‘At any rate, dear Glaucon,’ 24 24 "Very true. Then, I said, let us begin and create in idea a State; and yet thetrue creator is necessity, who is the mother of our invention. Of course, he replied. Now the first and greatest of necessities is food, which is the conditionof life and existence. Certainly. The second is a dwelling, and the third clothing and the like. @@ -579,17 +579,17 @@ They will. Not to mention the importers and exporters, who are called merchants? Yes. Then we shall want merchants? We shall. And if merchandise is to be carried over the sea, skilful sailorswill also be needed, and in considerable numbers? Yes, in considerable numbers. Then, again, within the city, how will they exchange their productions?To secure such an exchange was, as you will remember, one of our principalobjects when we formed them into a society and constituted a State." "Summary: The text discusses the creation of a State and the necessary roles and occupations within it. Narrative arc: Expository -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic idealism +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Husbandman, Builder, Weaver, Shoemaker, Neatherds, Shepherds, Curriers, Merchants, Sailors -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" And I said: “What are they?” And he answered: “They are the persons who will make up the State. The husbandman will cultivate the land, and all other occupations shall be carried on by these other persons.” “But suppose,” I said, “that a man is neither a Husbandman, nor a Builder, nor a Shoemaker, nor a Weaver, nor any of these other persons; what then will he do?” He answered: “Then I fancy that he cannot be one of our citizens, and therefore he cannot live among us, for we have no need of such a one.” “Then,” said I, “will not each of these persons make the natural goods his own?” “Certainly,” he replied; “but there must be justice in the distribution.” “What do you mean, my friend,” I asked, “by ‘justice in the distribution’? Do you mean that every one of them receives that which belongs to him?” “Yes,” he said, “and this is what I mean by justice, whether in the distribution of the goods of chance, or in anything else.” “But if anyone has not the virtue of a Shoemaker, or a Weaver, or a Builder, and yet maintains a shoemaker’s trade, and is a maker of shoes, though no artisan, would you call this justice?” “Certainly not,” he replied; “I should rather say that whatever flowed from such a source was bad and injurious.” “Then,” said I, “this artificial provision of ours which makes men cowards, physicians, rulers, husbands, and so on, is surely a very great evil?” “A very great evil,” he replied. “And when all these things put together are added to the original evil of discontented souls, have we not a right to imagine that perfect villany must arise among them?” “Yes,” he said, “there is nothing to prevent our positing all this.” “But if,” I said, “the virtues of wealth and poverty, of royalty, rule, and obedience, or of fatherhood and filial relationship were always to keep their proper places, and did not wander from their course and get out of order, would not such an arrangement of the State, if men made better use of the goods of chance, be perfectly beautiful as well as entirely self-sufficing?” “Yes,” he said, “that again would be the greatest possible beauty.” “Now then,” I said, “to go back to your earlier question, how shall we justify ourselves in taking another person’s property, as Thrasymachus and his companions affirm? Shall we not say with Homer, ‘Let each man gain what riches he can, and to him who would steal them let stealing be?’” “No,” he said, “we shall certainly not say this; but we may say that we owe to him who can defend himself the protection which justice gives, and that we ought to reward him with freewill, and give him honour and distinction.” +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "Such a State must have a Husbandman, to give us our Food; it must have a Builder, to give us our Houses and Walls of Defence; it must have a Weaver, to weave our Clothes; it must have a Shoemaker, for Shoes; it must have Neatherds, and Shepherds, for Milk, Cheese, and Meat; it must have Curriers, to dress Leather, and Merchants to buy and sell at home and abroad. Now, if these several Occupations be necessary, and every one of them must have some Reward for his Labour, how shall we divide the World among so many?"""" 50s. But surely the Necessities of Life are not so numerous as you imagine."""" 50s. No, Sir,"" answered Candide, ""they are not so numerous; but the Pleasures are very numerous; and it is necessary to provide for these."""" 50s. I believe,"" said Pangloss, ""that, in a well-ordered State, there should be publicly appointed Buffoons to make their Countrymen laugh: for nothing is fitter to distract the Mind of Man than to laugh."""" 50s. Certainly,"" said Candide; ""I know a Nobleman who has two Buffoons, and yet is very melancholy."""" 50s. It is probable that he has not enough to live upon; for a great Number of Jesters must be kept, in order to make Men divert themselves. I am sensible that there may be some Inconveniences from the too frequent Use of Laughter, because it distracts the Mind, not only from Thinking, but even from Weeping; for a Man would be absurd, who, when his Wife is dead, would choose to laugh instead of howling; or when he was hanged, that he should rather laugh than die sur le ton."""" 50s. A Woman does not always weep when her Husband dies,"" said Candide; ""and a Man is not always sur le ton when he is hanged."""" 50s. It is true,"" said Pangloss; ""but all Human Reason is contained in those two maxims. """"'Tis strange,"""" said Candide, """"that we have not found out these two Maxims till this Moment."""" 50s. Strange!"" replied Pangloss, ""are not these two propositions quite obvious? the first is, that we have no enjoyment but what is derived from that principle: 'All is well.' The second is, that 'Nature is made only for pleasure,' and that men are not born to be miserable."""" 50s. Alas!"" cried Candide, ""do not I feel my own misery, and do not I see that of others? Am I not in poverty? Am I not in want? Am I not in love? Am I not persecuted by every one, and must I not die? How! is not all this contrary to reason?"""" 50s. You talk like Martin,"" said Cacambo; """"if you go on in this manner, you will end by believing that Abelard is a fool."""" " 25 25 "Clearly they will buy and sell. Then they will need a market-place, and a money-token for purposesof exchange. Certainly. Suppose now that a husbandman, or an artisan, brings some productionto market, and he comes at a time when there is no one to exchangewith him, --is he to leave his calling and sit idle in the market-place? Not at all; he will find people there who, seeing the want, undertakethe office of salesmen. In well-ordered States they are commonly thosewho are the weakest in bodily strength, and therefore of little usefor any other purpose; their duty is to be in the market, and to givemoney in exchange for goods to those who desire to sell and to takemoney from those who desire to buy. @@ -605,16 +605,16 @@ But, said Glaucon, interposing, you have not given them a relish totheir meal. True, I replied, I had forgotten; of course they must have a relish-salt,and olives, and cheese, and they will boil roots and herbs such ascountry people prepare; for a dessert we shall give them figs, andpeas, and beans; and they will roast myrtle-berries and acorns atthe fire, drinking in moderation. And with such a diet they may beexpected to live in peace and health to a good old age, and bequeatha similar life to their children after them. Yes, Socrates, he said, and if you were providing for a city of pigs,how else would you feed the beasts? But what would you have, Glaucon? I replied. Why, he said, you should give them the ordinary conveniences of life.People who are to be comfortable are accustomed to lie on sofas, anddine off tables, and they should have sauces and sweets in the modernstyle." "Summary: The text discusses the creation of a market-place and the need for exchange, as well as the different classes of citizens in the State. -Enunciation: Dialogue between Socrates and Glaucon -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Classical Greek philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Husbandman, artisan, salesmen, retail-traders, merchants, hirelings Fuzzy place: Market-place -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "My good sir,"" he said, ""I wish you to make a beginning with the market-place; and in what way do we begin? Surely not by dividing it into two parts, one of which is to be the place of buying and selling, the other of assembly and hearing justice; there must be only one, must there not?"""" Certainly."" Well then,"" I said, ""we must let that be the place of all these things. That is part of the business of a husbandman, is it not?"""" Yes."" And now,"" I continued, ""you see, my man, the nature of the occupation of our future city?"" Very good indeed,"" he replied. ""And I see also that we are just coming to another division, are we not?"""" Even so. Then hear what follow next. There will be the farmers and other craftworkers, and merchants who will buy and sell, especially those who have come from other cities to reside in this one; for they will naturally gather together and form a part of the city."""" True."" Now when there are a number of them gathered together, and they begin to trade with one another, will they not find it better to give up this barter piecemeal and carry it on through exchange?"""" Certainly,"" he said, ""that would be the best thing."" And yet again, will not exchange be very much more troublesome than barter, unless there is some common measure of value?"""" Clearly,"" he said. Nay, but consider,"" I rejoined, ""if a person were to bring a talent of silver and another were to bring a talent of wheat, and they were to hold out their hands, which would they put into the other's hand first, if they wanted to exchange their goods?"" The money, clearly,"" he said. And suppose one person brought a mina of iron, and another a mina of wheat for sale?"""" The wheat, surely,"" he said. And if one person brought a bushel of millet and another a bushel of barley?"" The millet, for that is the better grain."" But if one person brought a pound of honey and another a pound of figs, and they were to hold out their hands at the same time, which would you take first?"" The honey,"" he said, ""for that is the sweeter."" And suppose one person brought a pound of cheese and another a pound of cypress-wood? Which would you take first?"" The wood would be the more useful to me, but the cheese would be most agreeable; so I should hesitate between the two."" Then you see,"" I said, ""that there must be a measure of value?"" Certainly."" And if so, can we discover any better standard or measure than a certain quantity of money, which is deemed to be a certain quantity of a certain quality of anything? For if we take any other measure, people will have no way of ascertaining, when they want to exchange, what they shall give in exchange for an equal amount of another thing. " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "It is the exchange of goods which creates a market-place, and when this is sufficiently developed we have the formation of a State. There is no necessary connection between the manufacture of goods and the holding of property; a man may be an excellent husbandman and yet own no land, or he may be an artisan and yet possess capital. These classes will supply the demand of the community by their respective wares, and to them must be added salesmen, retail-traders, merchants, and hirelings. Thus our ideal State is formed, and you are now prepared to understand how it is that each individual does not obtain what he desires from Nature but only what is permitted him by the State."""" The explanation appeared somewhat vague to me, but before I could express my doubts my friend had begun another monologue in which his harsh, vivid tones seemed to penetrate the very marrow of my bones, and set my nerves quivering with terror. When I think of all the crimes and murders which are committed in the world to-day, and for which no punishment can be inflicted adequate to the enormity of the offence, it seems strange to me that mankind should ever have invented such horrible forms of death as hanging, burning, and drowning. In the country where we are going these methods are unknown. " 26 26 "Yes, I said, now I understand: the question which you would have meconsider is, not only how a State, but how a luxurious State is created;and possibly there is no harm in this, for in such a State we shallbe more likely to see how justice and injustice originate. In my opinionthe true and healthy constitution of the State is the one which Ihave described. But if you wish also to see a State at fever heat,I have no objection. For I suspect that many will not be satisfiedwith the simpler way of way They will be for adding sofas, and tables,and other furniture; also dainties, and perfumes, and incense, andcourtesans, and cakes, all these not of one sort only, but in everyvariety; we must go beyond the necessaries of which I was at firstspeaking, such as houses, and clothes, and shoes: the arts of thepainter and the embroiderer will have to be set in motion, and goldand ivory and all sorts of materials must be procured. True, he said. Then we must enlarge our borders; for the original healthy State isno longer sufficient. Now will the city have to fill and swell witha multitude of callings which are not required by any natural want;such as the whole tribe of hunters and actors, of whom one large classhave to do with forms and colours; another will be the votaries ofmusic --poets and their attendant train of rhapsodists, players, dancers,contractors; also makers of divers kinds of articles, including women'sdresses. And we shall want more servants. Will not tutors be alsoin request, and nurses wet and dry, tirewomen and barbers, as wellas confectioners and cooks; and swineherds, too, who were not neededand therefore had no place in the former edition of our State, butare needed now? They must not be forgotten: and there will be animalsof many other kinds, if people eat them. Certainly. And living in this way we shall have much greater need of physiciansthan before? @@ -629,15 +629,15 @@ No tools will make a man a skilled workman, or master of defence,nor be of any u Yes, he said, the tools which would teach men their own use wouldbe beyond price. And the higher the duties of the guardian, I said, the more time,and skill, and art, and application will be needed by him?" "Summary: The speaker describes a luxurious state and the resulting conflicts and needs that arise. Narrative arc: Exposition -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation Active character: Socrates, Glaucon -Time setting: Contemporary -Diegetic time: A few minutes" Macht euch jetzt ein Bild von einem der reinen Glckseligen. Er ist auf die hchste Spitze gebracht, denn er hat einen Staats- und Regierungsapparat, der alles vor sich herscht. Aber es wird wieder spt oder es wird zu frh, der Gromann kommt, und da mu der Mann sein Kabinett verlassen und sich mit seinen Anhngern in den Busen der Erde zurkziehen. Der Gromann wird sie nicht suchen, und so kann er nur dort im Dunkeln und Stille sitzen und warten, bis er geringer und des Landes wird. Es ist doch gut genug, wenn er nur einmal im Leben das ganze Wunderwerk erlebt hat. Und man braucht auch noch nichts weiter als den Sinn fr eine groe, anmutige Komdie; man braucht nur die Natur, um wie ein Knabe darin spielen zu knnen. Ich sage euch: ein groes Reich ist ein herrliches Theaterstck. Sollte es nicht? Doch sind die Akteure ganz handfest, und was sie tun mgen, sei's nun gut oder schlecht, mut ich schon wissen. Und ich mu mich ber meine Tendenz nicht lnger bscheiden. Habt ihr euch nicht schon oft gedacht, da ein Mord unter uns geschehn wre? Nicht immer geschah er aber vor euren Augen, und niemand hat ihn begangen, der danach noch lebte. Ihr habt Euch gewahr, da jeder nur nach dem Zufall, der ihm begegnet war, entweder ein Opfer oder ein Mordpriest wurde. Und so tat er eben, weil ihm nichts anderes gelang. Wie leicht htten wir's haben knnen, wenn wir uns auf unsere Fassungskraft verlieen! Leute, die da herumspazieren und ihre Knie beugen, oder andere, die da herumlaufen und an den Schuhen ihrer Freunde schnuppern, werden von mir nicht mehr belustigt. Das Ding mu heut etwas Grberes werden. Glaubt mir, da soll es wirklich nicht das erste Mal sein. Httet ihr etwa vergessen, da ich euch schon darauf hingewiesen habe? Da das Menschengeschlecht in seinem ganzen Bestande nur aus zwei Brdern bestand, die alle Menschen erzeugt haben? Da sie sich im Kampfe entzweit hatten und ihre Nachkommen sich auch immer feindlich gegenberstanden, indem sie sich teils fortsetzten, teils auslschten? Seht ihr es denn nicht? Die Vter waren die reinen Griechen, die Jungen die Barbaren. Ihr seid Zeuge, wie beide Parteien sich in unserem Volke fortsetzen. Wenn ihr ein wenig weiter achtet, wer hier sitzt und wer dort steht, wer hier spricht und wer dort lauscht, wer den Mund ffnet und wer ihn schliet, wer ans Fenster geht und wer aufs Kanapee sinkt, wer das Glas ergreift und wer den Faden spinnelt, wer das Wort fhrt und wer nur nickt, wer warm ist und wer friert, wer magisch anzusehen ist und wer es nur wagt, wer durchblicken will und wer die Augen niederschlagen mu, wer lacht und wer weint, wer schweigt und wer redet, wer gut aussieht und wer schlecht, wer weit und wer nah, wer in der Mitte und wer in der Ecke, wer voran und wer zurck, wer in die Welt kommt und wer aus ihr geht, wer wnscht und wer hat, wer schwankt und wer tritt auf festen Grund, wer nach vorn und wer nach hinten geht, wer zu beiden Seiten, wer sich bewegt und wer stille steht, wer aufrecht steht und wer am Boden liegt, wer ein Kind ist und wer ein Mann, wer ein Mnnerchen und wer ein Mdchen, wer jung und wer alt, wer da ist und wer noch kommen wird, wer wohl und wer krank, wer ist und wer wird sein. +Time setting: 1950s +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "And you can imagine the state of those who are born into this sort of luxury. They have a lot to be happy about and no need at all, so they don't know what they want except maybe a few toys. So they go around bored, miserable, and unhappy, and they want everything they can't have and hate everyone who has more than they do. They get mad when they can't have anything they want, and they're always fighting and killing each other over nothing. And whenever they do get something, it's never enough, so they get more and more greedy until they ruin themselves and everybody else."""" That's true,"" said Glaucon. ""I remember reading about Nero. He was an old man then, but he had been raised in that kind of luxury since he was a baby. He used to take off his gold earrings and scratch them on the wall just to hear them jingle. And I've heard about these rich people who stuff their clothes with cotton batting, so they'll feel like they're fat even if they're not. It's crazy."""" Well, now we know why Socrates wanted to leave Athens,"" said David, ""but what happened to him when he got out here?"""" He was able to live a quiet life for a while,"" said Alfredo. ""He was a self-made millionaire, so he didn't have any relatives who'd come demanding money or asking for jobs. And he wasn't too old to make new friends and start over. But pretty soon he got bored, and then he wanted something he couldn't have."""" A woman?"" said David. No, worse than that. He wanted to have power again. He wanted to play god and control the lives of other men. " 27 27 "No doubt, he replied. Will he not also require natural aptitude for his calling? Certainly. Then it will be our duty to select, if we can, natures which are fittedfor the task of guarding the city? It will. And the selection will be no easy matter, I said; but we must be braveand do our best. @@ -665,16 +665,16 @@ Why? Why, because he distinguishes the face of a friend and of an enemyonly by t Most assuredly. And is not the love of learning the love of wisdom, which is philosophy? They are the same, he replied. And may we not say confidently of man also, that he who is likelyto be gentle to his friends and acquaintances, must by nature be alover of wisdom and knowledge?" "Summary: The text discusses the qualities and characteristics of a good guardian, including bravery, spirit, and love of wisdom. Narrative arc: Discussion and exploration of the qualities of a good guardian -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation or dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, the interlocutor -Time setting: Contemporary -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "And yet I was going to say that he is just the man who would be the most likely to fall into danger himself. But that's nonsense, isn't it?"""" He's a fool."" Well, then,"" I said, ""he must have spirit and courage, or how could he stand up against his enemies?"""" Yes, of course, if they attack him; but what about when they don't?"""" Why, in that case he must have courage too, or else he wouldn't want to get at them and punish them."""" So you think he should be able to go after people who are doing wrong as well as fight against those who attack him?"" Yes, I do,"" I answered. And he must have knowledge of gymnastics, or else how will he be able to defend himself from an attack by a boxer or a wrestler or some one else like that?"""" No, certainly not."" Nor, again, is he likely to know about boxing or wrestling unless he has been trained in them himself."""" Exactly."" And therefore he must have had a good deal of education in gymnastics and athletics."" Yes, certainly."" Then he can't have come from a low-class family; he must come from a middle-class one."""" Why not?"" Because someone with a rich father couldn't possibly bother about these things; he'd have plenty of leisure for everything else."""" Yes, that's true,"" he said. Now take it this way: let's suppose that we found such a man, with all the qualities that we've mentioned. What sort of a character would he have?"""" A rather hard-boiled character, I should say."" Well, now, does a hard-boiled character mean the same thing as a good character?"" Goodness knows,"" he said. ""In any case, he oughtn't to be light-hearted; he must be very deep."""" That's right,"" I said; ""yes, and he must also be deeply in love with wisdom."" In love with wisdom!"" he exclaimed. Of course,"" I said; ""otherwise he wouldn't be willing to face dangers in order to acquire it. " +Time setting: 1950s +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "He's not going to be the kind of guardian who is always ordering people about, and making laws for them. You've got to have a man who is brave enough to fight when he has to; but also who is wise enough not to fight unless he really has to."""" I don't see how that can possibly go together,"" I said. ""How could you have a man who was both so brave and yet so cautious?"""" It's easy enough if he's got spirit enough,"" Socrates said. ""Suppose you had a little boy growing up in your house. If he were just afraid of everything, and cried every time something hurt him or startled him, then he'd be useless as a fighter; and he'd make you pretty tired of having him around, too. But suppose he had some courage, and wasn't afraid of everything, and yet was careful and didn't run into every danger he saw. Then he would be useful to you in fighting off robbers and burglars and things like that. And he'd be good company to you and your wife, because he wouldn't be a coward. Now, that's what our ideal guardian must be like. He must be bold enough to meet any danger when it comes along, but he must be careful enough not to look for trouble unnecessarily."""" I think I see that,"" I said. ""It seems like a very good idea, anyway. But I still don't understand how you are going to get a man who is both brave and yet wise enough to be cautious."""" Well, now, that's where love of wisdom comes in,"" Socrates said. ""You know, most men are just fools. They're interested in one thing only, and that's getting all they can for themselves, and satisfying their own appetites. That's why there are always wars and fights and quarrels and hatreds, and why men are always trying to get the better of each other, and stealing from each other, and even killing each other. But a man who loves wisdom will want to know the truth about everything, and he won't try to deceive anybody; he'll tell the truth, whether it hurts him or not, and he'll want everybody else to do the same thing."""" I can understand that,"" I said. ""But what does that have to do with being brave and yet cautious?"""" Well, if a man loves wisdom, he wants to know the truth about everything. So he studies philosophy, and learns to distinguish between right and wrong, and good and evil. And when he learns that, he doesn't always act on impulse, without thinking first, just like a fool would do. He thinks first, and that makes him cautious."""" I'm beginning to see it,"" I said. ""Yes, that would explain a lot of things."" Well, now,"" Socrates said, ""I'm going to tell you another thing about our ideal guardians. " 28 28 "That we may safely affirm. Then he who is to be a really good and noble guardian of the Statewill require to unite in himself philosophy and spirit and swiftnessand strength? Undoubtedly. Then we have found the desired natures; and now that we have foundthem, how are they to be reared and educated? Is not this enquirywhich may be expected to throw light on the greater enquiry whichis our final end --How do justice and injustice grow up in States?for we do not want either to omit what is to the point or to drawout the argument to an inconvenient length. Socrates - ADEIMANTUS @@ -698,17 +698,17 @@ A fault which is most serious, I said; the fault of telling a lie,and, what is m But when is this fault committed? Whenever an erroneous representation is made of the nature of godsand heroes, --as when a painter paints a portrait not having the shadowof a likeness to the original. Yes, he said, that sort of thing is certainly very blamable; but whatare the stories which you mean?" "Summary: The text discusses the importance of education and the need to censor stories told to children. Narrative arc: Exposition -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue Active character: Socrates, Adeimantus Quoted work: Homer, Hesiod, other poets -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" Socrates. Was, wenn einer von den Kindern das Verbrechen erfhrt, das die Mutter verdammt? Adeimantus. Er wird sich schmen, wenn er sieht, da der gute Alcibiades oder der tapfre Theseus so schlecht gewesen sind; und deswegen will ich nicht, da es in dem Buche steht. Socrates. Aber dann ist es doch alles eine Lge! Adeimantus. So sei's denn! Wer sagt euch aber, da ihr ein Jngling seid, der sich auf diesen Romanen ernsthaft unterhlt? Socrates. Oha! Das ist ja wunderbar! Da ich mich auf Romane ernsthaft unterhalte! Adeimantus. Ich habe euch gesagt, da wir von den Herren zu reden haben, und zwar solche, welche ber unsern Kopf stehen. Nehmt ihr nicht an, da die meisten Menschen sehr klug sind, und da sie auch von Hause aus einen sehr vortrefflichen Charakter haben? Nun, was macht der Mensch dann, der klug und gut ist? Schreibt er wohl Geschichten, um den Haufen Leute zu bilden, die ihm folgen und ihn leiten sollen? Wie kann er das tun? Er mu unverzglich sorgen, daß sein Werk seinen Zweck erreicht. Also nehmt an, da alle diese Dichter viel klüger waren als ihr und daß ihnen das Kindesalter ebenso leicht ging wie euch. Und nun sage mir, was sie zum besten hielten: wollten sie die Kinder lieben, oder hassen? Wenn ihr meint, daß sie sie liebten, so fragt euch, was sie mit ihnen taten: gaben sie ihnen Kost oder Gift? Mit Recht werden sie sagen, daß ihr selbst, wenn ihr wirklich klug wäret, kein anderes Mittel gefunden htet, die Kinder zu lieben, als ihnen Wahrheiten zu sagen. Doch warum sollt ihr jetzt schwach sein, wo sie stark waren? Sagt mir, was sie taten, wenn sie eure Väter waren? Sie sagten euch, da es zwei Wesen gebe, das Eine gütig und gerecht, das andere wild und gefährlich, und man nannte es Typhos, Zeus, Poseidon, Pluto, Apollon, Hermes und anderes Ungetüm, das erfindete je nach seinem Geist, und jedes dieser Wesen war eines Gefährdes. Dann machten sie sich vor, da es viele Götter gebe, und das waren nichts anders als ihre eigenen Wahnideen, durch welche sie euch beflexteten, indem sie euch sagten, du sollst Zeus sein, du Aietes, und du Hyperion, und du Apollo, und du Mnemosyne, und du Triton, und du Kypris, und du Artemis, und du Leto, und du Nemesis, und du Demeter, und du Persephone, und du Athene, und du Aphrodite, und du Hestia, und du Hera, und du Dionysos, und du Pan, und du Hephaistos, und du Ares, und du Hebe, und du Asklepios, und du Himeros, und du Thanatos, und du Hypnos, und du Moirai, und du Charites, und du Horae, und du Muses, und du Nymphai, und du Nymphe, und du Dryades, und du Hamadryades, und du Lampads, und du Gorgonen, und du Graien, und du Harpyien, und du Sirenen, und du Kerkopes, und du Akmoniden, und du Antai, und du Kentauren, und du Satyrn, und du Megaloi, und du Minyai, und du Telchinen, und du Titans, und du Gigantes, und du Erinyen, und du Lamiae, und du Empusae, und du Striges, und du Biblis, und du Chimaera, und du Sphinx, und du Basilisk, und du Scytale, und du Drachen, und du Phönixe, und du Basilisk, und du Lamia, und du Phoenix, und du Chimaera, und du Harpyje, und du Scylla, und du Sirenen, und du Griffin, und du Skylla, und du Sphinx, und du Hydra, und du Kerber, und du Minotaurus, und du Chrysaor, und du Pegasos, und du Chimaira, und du Hippocampus, und du Centaur, und du Python, und du Geryon, und du Argos, und du Orthros, und du Echidna, und du Hesperides, und du Hyades, und du Atlant, und du Arimaspe, und du Asterien, und du Amazone, und du Gelinden, und du Nasamonen, und du Libyen, und du Iber, und du Geten, und du Illyrer, und du Thraker, und du Phryger, und du Lyder, und du Troer, und du Danaer, und du Pelasger, und du Achaier, und du Ionier, und du Dorier, und du Epier, und du Eleer, und du Athenienser, und du Korinther, und du Sikyonier, und du Phokier, und du Lokrer, und du Boioter, und du Thebaner, und du Eleuther, und du Myrmidonen, und du Achill, und du Odysseus, und du Diomedes, und du Agamemnon, und du Menelaos, und du Ajax, und du Palamedes, und du Nestor, und du Idomeneus, und du Thersites, und du Meriones, und du Philoktetes, und du Teukros, und du Eurypylos, und du Eurylos, und du Leitos, und du Antilochus, und du Machaon, und du Podaleirios, und du Eurymachos, und du Antinoos, und du Amphinomos, und du Haliters, und du Eupeithes, und du Dolichus, und du Elpenor, und du Eurylochos, und du Euryalus, und du Amphialos, und du Anapios, und du Antiphates, und du Arete, und du Echeneus, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du Eurylochos, und du E +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "I agree with you most entirely,"" said Socrates. ""But we are not at present considering the value of education, but the character of the stories that should be told to children."""" Well, then, what are the stories that we tell them?"" cried Adeimantus. I will try to explain my view of them by reminding you of a common fact. You know that there is no danger of children being corrupted by fairy tales like those which make the cruel pastimes of giants and monsters seem elegant and fair."""" Yes, I know,"" said Glaucon; ""those which show the adventures of heroes who fought against them and slaughtered them."""" But why do we admit Homer and Hesiod to relate the battles of the gods?"""" Because these poets are inspired."" If they were inspired,"" said Adeimantus, ""they would surely have been inspired in the same way as the bards who told of the giants."""" By Hypnos and Thanatus, my friend; but the poets tell of the struggles of gods and titans."""" Then God and the Devil are struggling within us, and God has bested the Devil."" A dreadful state of things!"" said Glaucon. The greatest possible,"" answered Socrates. ""And the greatest horror of all is the belief that this is virtue, which we teach our children by the stories which we tell them."""" " 29 29 "First of all, I said, there was that greatest of all lies, in highplaces, which the poet told about Uranus, and which was a bad lietoo, --I mean what Hesiod says that Uranus did, and how Cronus retaliatedon him. The doings of Cronus, and the sufferings which in turn hisson inflicted upon him, even if they were true, ought certainly notto be lightly told to young and thoughtless persons; if possible,they had better be buried in silence. But if there is an absolutenecessity for their mention, a chosen few might hear them in a mystery,and they should sacrifice not a common [Eleusinian] pig, but somehuge and unprocurable victim; and then the number of the hearers willbe very few indeed. Why, yes, said he, those stories are extremely objectionable. Yes, Adeimantus, they are stories not to be repeated in our State;the young man should not be told that in committing the worst of crimeshe is far from doing anything outrageous; and that even if he chastiseshis father when does wrong, in whatever manner, he will only be followingthe example of the first and greatest among the gods. @@ -723,13 +723,13 @@ Certainly. And no good thing is hurtful? No, indeed. And that which is not hurtf Assuredly. Then God, if he be good, is not the author of all things, as the manyassert, but he is the cause of a few things only, and not of mostthings that occur to men. For few are the goods of human life, andmany are the evils, and the good is to be attributed to God alone;of the evils the causes are to be sought elsewhere, and not in him. That appears to me to be most true, he said. Then we must not listen to Homer or to any other poet who is guiltyof the folly of saying that two casks Lie at the threshold of Zeus,full of lots, one of good, the other of evil lots, and that he towhom Zeus gives a mixture of the two Sometimes meets with evil fortune,at other times with good; but that he to whom is given the cup ofunmingled ill," "Summary: The narrator discusses the importance of not telling certain stories to young people and suggests that only a few should hear them. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Plato's philosophy -Active character: Adeimantus" """""We must not tell them of those who are least able to understand them; they would only laugh at us and think that we were jesting. They would fancy that the arguments from justice were a mere piece of silly rhetoric and that there was really nothing else worthy of consideration, if, after having been told that when they do wrong or disobey, they ought not to conceal the fact, and should instead of hiding it admit that injustice is both shameful and wicked, having first deliberated about the just and unjust with a view to the acquisition of virtue and the establishment of friendship and order in the State and themselves, they were then told by us that, in reality, they had better reverse their former opinion; and that justice is not after all for the sake of these things, but these other things for the sake of justice; and that the reason why men ought to desire and honour justice is not because it benefits either themselves or their friends, or hurts their enemies, but because it makes them just. This comes to pass, he said, because men know not the true nature of goodness. No: some men, he said, are just in the belief that justice is evil, and only bear it because they are afraid of the punishment which will follow injustice. And the public analogy of this class of men is the lion, who is conscious of his own strength and is therefore fearful of attacking the weaker. Another class are just for the sake of reward, whom the public analogy would be of the dog, wanting food and on good terms with his master. A third class are just for the sake of honour and fame, and would act in the same way towards their friends and opponents: the public analogue of this class would be the bee, who basks in the consciousness of her own power and in the approval of her own kind. And there is yet another class, being the greatest and the best, who desire to be just on account of the just or honourable. They will not give way to fear or any other passion which may interfere with what they regard as their duty, since they are aware that, doing what is right, they will at the same time promote their own interest; and not only so, but will injure neither their friends nor strangers. The greatest among these, he said, are those whose might of spirit is combined with the perfection of gentleness; here are our gentlemen, I replied, taking the definition from the Lacedaemonians. Very true, he said; and your description of them is very excellent. Well, I said, and what does the simile withdraw? Clearly, I replied, some creature who is gentle amid the violence of others, and is the friend and guardian of everyone who is weak, and by that reason alone holds every ship safe which has her for captain and ruler. You mean the state, he said, which is ruled by a king? Yes, I answered, simpling the image to him; and this is a better image of justice than the previous one. " +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: Adeimantus" """""And you must not tell that story to young people, or they may catch it from you and be infected. The children of good parents will hardly get the passion in them; but if they do, and if their temperaments are well adapted, then the poor things will have to die. For there is no cure for the evil of man, only death, and that not he. And now go away, my dear friend, back to your place in the cave. You must not see what follows. If you would like to look on, come with me, and I will introduce you to some friends who live above earth, and whose food is human flesh."""" He did not say much more, but led the way up the mountain-side, through thorns and thickets, till we came to a cave among the rocks, and went in. There were two men within, one sitting and one lying down, and both appeared to be asleep. Adeimantus said nothing to me, but passed by them and went out again into the sun. Presently the sleeper stretched himself and got up. Then Adeimantus spoke to him, and said: """"Friend, how would you like to have these two gentlemen as your guests?"""" """"I should like them very much,"""" he answered; """"but where are they from?"""" """"One is a Thracian,"""" said Adeimantus; """"the other an Athenian. They have just come up over the rocks from below."""" " 30 30 "Him wild hunger drives o'er the beauteous earth. And again Zeus, who is the dispenser of good and evil to us. And if any oneasserts that the violation of oaths and treaties, which was reallythe work of Pandarus, was brought about by Athene and Zeus, or thatthe strife and contention of the gods was instigated by Themis andZeus, he shall not have our approval; neither will we allow our youngmen to hear the words of Aeschylus, that God plants guilt among menwhen he desires utterly to destroy a house. And if a poet writes ofthe sufferings of Niobe --the subject of the tragedy in which theseiambic verses occur --or of the house of Pelops, or of the Trojanwar or on any similar theme, either we must not permit him to saythat these are the works of God, or if they are of God, he must devisesome explanation of them such as we are seeking; he must say thatGod did what was just and right, and they were the better for beingpunished; but that those who are punished are miserable, and thatGod is the author of their misery --the poet is not to be permittedto say; though he may say that the wicked are miserable because theyrequire to be punished, and are benefited by receiving punishmentfrom God; but that God being good is the author of evil to any oneis to be strenuously denied, and not to be said or sung or heard inverse or prose by any one whether old or young in any well-orderedcommonwealth. Such a fiction is suicidal, ruinous, impious. I agree with you, he replied, and am ready to give my assent to thelaw. @@ -748,12 +748,12 @@ If he change at all he can only change for the worse, for we cannotsuppose him t Very true, Adeimantus; but then, would any one, whether God or man,desire to make himself worse? Impossible. Then it is impossible that God should ever be willing to change; being,as is supposed, the fairest and best that is conceivable, every godremains absolutely and for ever in his own form. That necessarily follows, he said, in my judgment. Then, I said, my dear friend, let none of the poets tell us that" "Summary: The text discusses the role of God and his relationship with human suffering and punishment. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Dialogue -Literary movement: Enlightenment" Si el gran Dios es bueno, y si quiere que seamos buenos tambien nosotros, cmo ha podido ser que no haya querido impedir los grandes males que han afligido a mis desgraciados padres? No le he dicho yo mil veces que el diablo me provoca con este mismo argumento para que abandone la religion de mi padre? Y yo te he respondido mil veces que el mal que viene del diablo no se opone al bien que viene de Dios. Pero, ni aun asi, has dejado de dudar. No hay duda ninguna que ese mal es obra del diablo; pero como el diablo es un enemigo menor de Dios, el bien que viene de Dios le vence siempre, aunque l lance sobre los hombres todas las fuerzas de su poder. Porque Dios no puede dejar de ser bueno, cuando ha querido crearte a ti, nino mio, que eres su hijo adoptivo, y que tienes derecho a ir a su seno sin temor de que te haga mal. Yo creo que el que te hace padecer lo que padeces ahora es tu pobre madre, que te quiere tanto, y que no sabe hablarte en otra lengua que en la de sus sentimientos, y que no tiene mas remedio que llorar, llamar por tu nombre y sacudirte con sus manos; porque ella siente que has hecho una cosa muy mala, y que es preciso que la corrijas, o que, si no, vas a padecer todavia mayores desgracias. Pues, mira: como la madre es buena, no quieres que la castigue Dios, a pesar de que sea justicia que se castigue; sino que quieres que se cumpla la palabra del Evangelio, que dice: Amad a vuestros enemigos, y orad por los que os persiguen; y que El que ama al que le ama, mas ama al que le aborrece; y que Si no perdonais a los hombres sus culpas, tampoco vuestro Padre celestial perdonara vuestras culpas. Dices que Dios no castiga a los malvados en esta vida, sino que espera castigarlos en la otra. Pues bien, vamos a ver si puedes decirme cual es la manera en que puede esperarlo, si estan alli ya preparados para que les castigue? Querrias que fuese Dios un tirano, como son los reyes de la tierra, y que teniendo a todos sus criados prisioneros en su palacio, mientras no se portaran bien, los castigase? Si Dios fuese asi, seria tan bueno como esos tiranos de aqui abajo, que no castigan a sus esclavos sino cuando quieren; y que, a veces, no los castigan nunca, y aun danles libertad para hacer cuanto les paresca. Dios no es asi, porque es justo y bondadoso: pero tambien es veraz, y cumple siempre su palabra. La palabra de Dios es que todo el que haga mal, debe pagarle al mal que ha hecho. Ahora bien: ? donde va a pagarle? Es evidente que no en esta vida: porque muchos que han hecho mucho mal, y deben pagar mucho mal, viven contentos y felices, sin que nadie los moleste. Porque ? donde van a pagarle cuando mueren? No pueden ir a pagarle a donde ellos misman han ido? No pueden ir al purgatorio, que es adonde van todas las almas de los muertos? En esto el viejo hizo una pausa, y echando un trago de whisky , prosiguio con mayor animo: +Literary movement: Hardboiled" "I'm glad to see you. I've been wanting to talk with you."""" What about?"" A lot of things. For one thing, the part God plays in human suffering and punishment."""" What do you mean?"" That's what we'll discuss,"""" he said grimly. """"Let's start from a rather unpleasant fact that has just come to my attention. You know the woman who runs the little grocery store across the street?"""" Yes."" Well, last night some maniac broke into her house and beat her senseless. She was found unconscious this morning by the grocer who came to open up."""" My God! Is she badly hurt?"" I don't know how badly. She's in the hospital now, under sedation. But it seems pretty bad."""" I hope they catch the son of a bitch!"" The son of a bitch is already caught,"" he said. ""His name is Joe Something-or-other, and he lives in your building."""" What!"" I said. ""You're kidding!"""" No, I'm not."" It can't be!"" It is."" Well, damn it! He's got a family. How could he do a thing like that?"" I don't know why he did it,"" he said. ""That's what I want you to help me find out."""" We'll sit down over there and talk about it,"" he said, indicating the couch and chair. But I didn't move. """"Maybe you'd better tell me why you came here tonight,"""" I said. Well, for one thing,"" he said, ""I came to ask you to get out of the narcotics business."""" I told you before I wouldn't do that."" I know you won't,"" he said. ""But I thought maybe if you knew how serious your situation is you might reconsider."""" Don't push me too far,"" I said. I took a cigarette from his pack on the table and lit it. I felt calm and collected; an odd feeling when I thought of the events of the day. """"All right, let's talk about the guy who beat up that poor old woman,"""" I said. """"How do you know he lives in my building?"""" I saw him coming out of his apartment just as I was going in,"""" he said. """"He couldn't have gotten very far. I doubt if he even had a chance to hide the gun he used."""" That's ridiculous,"" I said. ""Joe is a good guy. He's not the type to go around beating up women."""" Then he's the wrong type to be carrying a gun,"" he said. ""And that's the point: he doesn't know anything about guns. He's afraid of them. He knows something happened to his wife while he was asleep last night with the gun under his pillow. He's afraid someone stole it. That's why he's trying to buy another one."""" Do you think he killed her?"" I asked. I think he's a murderer,"" he said. ""I think he's been murdering people for years."""" " 31 31 "The gods, taking the disguise of strangers from other lands, walkup and down cities in all sorts of forms; and let no one slander Proteusand Thetis, neither let any one, either in tragedy or in any otherkind of poetry, introduce Here disguised in the likeness of a priestessasking an alms For the life-giving daughters of Inachus the river of Argos; --letus have no more lies of that sort. Neither must we have mothers underthe influence of the poets scaring their children with a bad versionof these myths --telling how certain gods, as they say, 'Go aboutby night in the likeness of so many strangers and in divers forms';but let them take heed lest they make cowards of their children, andat the same time speak blasphemy against the gods. Heaven forbid, he said. But although the gods are themselves unchangeable, still by witchcraftand deception they may make us think that they appear in various forms? @@ -770,16 +770,16 @@ That is inconceivable. But he may have friends who are senseless or mad? But no Yes. Then is God perfectly simple and true both in word and deed; he changesnot; he deceives not, either by sign or word, by dream or waking vision. Your thoughts, he said, are the reflection of my own. You agree with me then, I said, that this is the second type or formin which we should write and speak about divine things. The gods arenot magicians who transform themselves, neither do they deceive mankindin any way. I grant that. Then, although we are admirers of Homer, we do not admire the lyingdream which Zeus sends to Agamemnon; neither will we praise the versesof Aeschylus in which Thetis says that Apollo at her nuptials" "Summary: The text discusses the nature of lies and deception in relation to the gods. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue Active character: Socrates, interlocutor Quoted work: Homer, Aeschylus -Time setting: Contemporary -Diegetic time: A few minutes" """""I don't mind telling you that I have been deceived by lies and deceivers before now, but never by the gods. So I shall not believe that they deceive men; it is not in their character to do so."""" Socrates: You are wrong there. The story of Ulysses proves it. He did not get home until after he had heard from the seer Tiresias in Hades that he would be detained for another ten years. And what about Aeschylus' Agamemnon? There Prometheus tells Zeus himself that he has made a mistake in allowing Menelaus to sail for Troy because, as soon as he returns, his wife will kill him!"""" Interlocutor: That doesn't prove anything. It merely shows that the gods can make mistakes like anybody else. Socrates: Yes, when they interfere with human affairs they often make mistakes. But when they remain aloof they never make them. If they wanted to prevent a man's murder, they could do so easily enough without interfering with the course of events. All they need to do is to inspire the victim with the idea of leaving home. Then the murderer will find nothing to murder. But if they want to play a trick on him they will certainly succeed. " +Time setting: 1950s +Diegetic time: A few minutes" Quand tu as dit cela, tu avais raison; mais si tu dis que les dieux sont fiers et jaloux, tu te trompes, car ils sont comme des voleurs. De quelle manire? Pourquoi ne pas le dire tout de suite! Ils volent en cachette, sous les auspices de la nuit, et non o l'on peut les voir. Comment? Par exemple, dans Homre ou Aeschyle? Oui, par exemple. Et dans quels passages? Voici quelques-uns: Quand Zeus a voulu saisir Ganymde, il s'est dguis en un coq bleu, cause, je suppose, de sa jalousie envers Tantale. Dans une autre circonstance, il a pris la figure de Cyros, afin de coucher avec la fille d'Helius. Ici, nous avons une preuve certaine de son infidlit conjugale. Il s'est rendu chez Admete sous la forme de Phtolus, cause de son amour pour Alcste, et il s'est empar du corps de ce dernier, qui allait tre brul l'poque o Sthneboe avait dt aux Grecs l'art de la divination. La belle affaire! Si vous continuez ainsi, vous ne ferez jamais finir votre discours. Mais quoi! Si je commence parler, on dira que j'ai menti; si je m'arrte, on me prendra pour un sot! J'ai envie de faire comme ces acteurs de cinma qui n'ont rien dire et font semblant de chercher leurs phrases. Mais allons au fait, et voyons ce que je dois faire. Je vais donc continuer; seulement je rpte encore mon souhait que quelqu'un de vous prenne ma place, et que le jeu se poursuive sans moi. Cela ne m'inquiete pas, car je n'ai pas besoin de mentir, puisque je puis avouer mes erreurs. Vous avez bien raison, car lorsque l'on avoue ses fautes, on est moins coupable que lorsqu'on tche de les dissimuler. Eh bien! Les dieux ont tous des figures ridicules et des corps monstrueux, et cependant ils se plaisent beaucoup se dguiser. Voici, par exemple, Apollon, qui est gros et velu, s'est dguis en jeune homme beau, pour attirer la nymphe Daphne, et lui avoir un enfant. Il s'est dguis en chameau, pour aller trouver Io. Ensuite, Jupiter s'est transform en taureau, pour prendre la femme d'Ammon. Or, comment ces dieux se transforment-ils? Par magie, n'est-ce pas? Et pourquoi s'amuseraient-ils l'exercer sur les hommes, si ce n'est pour les tromper? Ne voil-t-il pas clair? Mais, reprit Socrate, je ne voudrais pas rester plus longtemps assis, si je n'tais pas certain que vous allez venir moi, et me dmontrer que je suis un sot. 32 32 "Was celebrating in song her fair progeny whose days were to he long,and to know no sickness. And when he had spoken of my lot as in allthings blessed of heaven he raised a note of triumph and cheered mysoul. And I thought that the word of Phoebus being divine and fullof prophecy, would not fail. And now he himself who uttered the strain,he who was present at the banquet, and who said this --he it is whohas slain my son. These are the kind of sentiments about the gods which will arouseour anger; and he who utters them shall be refused a chorus; neithershall we allow teachers to make use of them in the instruction ofthe young, meaning, as we do, that our guardians, as far as men canbe, should be true worshippers of the gods and like them. I entirely agree, be said, in these principles, and promise to makethem my laws. @@ -801,14 +801,14 @@ And the soul, with shrilling cry, passed like smoke beneath the earth.And, -- As bats in hollow of mystic cavern, whenever any of the has droppedout of the string and falls from the rock, fly shrilling and clingto one another, so did they with shrilling cry hold together as theymoved. And we must beg Homer and the other poets not to be angry ifwe strike out these and similar passages, not because they are unpoetical,or unattractive to the popular ear, but because the greater the poeticalcharm of them, the less are they meet for the ears of boys and menwho are meant to be free, and who should fear slavery more than death. Undoubtedly. Also we shall have to reject all the terrible and appalling namesdescribe the world below --Cocytus and Styx, ghosts under the earth,and sapless shades, and any similar words of which the very mentioncauses a shudder to pass through the inmost soul of him who hearsthem. I do not say that these horrible stories may not have a useof some kind; but there is a danger that the nerves of our guardiansmay be rendered too excitable and effeminate by them. There is a real danger, he said. Then we must have no more of them. True. Another and a nobler strain must be composed and sung by us." "Summary: The text discusses the importance of teaching children about the gods and the afterlife, and how certain stories should be censored to promote courage and freedom. -Enunciation: Dialogue between Socrates and Adaimantus -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy -Active character: Socrates, Adaimantus" For even among the most intelligent people, Socrates, you will find men who believe in the gods, but do not believe in their existence. In fact, this is a point I have been very anxious to establish by a series of lectures which I have delivered during the past month: that there are two kinds of gods—the one divine and immortal, the other mortal and generated—so that those who believe in the latter only may be convicted of atheism.” “I am afraid,” said Socrates, “that I shall never be able to grasp your meaning. What is the difference between the two kinds of gods?” “The difference,” replied Adaimantus, “is very great. The gods of the poets are always doing mischief and being punished for it; while the gods of the philosophers are wise and good and beneficent. For example, Zeus hurls a thunderbolt at Prometheus, who had given fire to man, and Hephaestus binds him to a rock and plucks out his liver every day, till he confesses that it was wrong of him to give man fire. Again, Ares is always going about fighting with the other gods, and Hermes is always cheating people and stealing their cattle, and Hera is always plotting against Zeus; so that they are all thoroughly bad characters, and not worth having anything to do with. But the gods of the philosophers, like Plato’s or Pythagoras’, are the embodiments of wisdom and goodness, and can teach us how to live our lives better.” “I see,” said Socrates; “and yet I cannot help thinking that the poets would not have made their gods into such rascals if they had not meant to convey some moral lesson by their behaviour.” “Of course they did,” cried Adaimantus, “but their lessons are often rather hard-boiled ones. We must try to extract them as carefully as possible, and to eliminate everything which is not wholesome for the young.” “That is quite true,” said Socrates. “But what about the story of Orpheus? You remember how Eurydice was killed by a snake, and Orpheus went down into Hades and persuaded Pluto to let her come back again on condition that he led her up without looking at her. Of course he looked round just as they were crossing the river Styx, and then she disappeared for ever, and he has been wandering about ever since, trying to find her. Now what moral can we draw from that?” “You may take it as a warning,” said Adaimantus, “to children not to look at snakes in case they should bite them and die, and then their relations will be miserable and go about crying for years afterwards.” “Yes,” said Socrates, “but suppose the child asked why Eurydice had to be bitten by the snake in the first place, what answer could you make to him?” “It might be explained,” said Adaimantus, “that women were naturally weak and foolish creatures, and that snakes were born to prey upon them, just as flies are born to prey upon bees.” “No, no,” said Socrates, “we must be careful not to give any impression that women are inferior to men. +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: Socrates, Adaimantus" "But in order that the young may be able to endure the terrors of death, and the pangs of childbirth, and other sufferings which nature has appointed them to suffer, they should learn at an early age that Hades is a god, and a brother of Zeus, who has been driven out by his brothers to the abodes beneath the earth. And when he comes and takes away their friends, then let them not weep or wail, but instead of that sweetly say to him: Thou art welcome, our dearest friend hath come, whom we have long expected; do with us as you will."" And when one of them is about to give birth to a child, let the women who are about her say that the new-born child is only going to Hades for a little while, 'whereas we remain here, and they will also return to us; but this blessed child will be with you the whole time.' For if these things are told to children in early youth, Socrates, they will not be very likely to fall into despair at the hour of birth or death. But now, Adaimantus, I am in doubt whether you and I had better begin anew from the foundation and set down before ourselves the character which justice and injustice are to have in the constitution which we are describing, or rather let us assume that we have agreed on the nature of each of them, and proceed at once to speak of their effects upon men in life and in death."""" The latter course, I think, would be best, he said. And thereupon Crito made a sign to me that I should go on. " 33 33 "Clearly. And shall we proceed to get rid of the weepings and wailings of famousmen? They will go with the rest. But shall we be right in getting rid of them? Reflect: our principleis that the good man will not consider death terrible to any othergood man who is his comrade. Yes; that is our principle. And therefore he will not sorrow for his departed friend as thoughhe had suffered anything terrible? @@ -831,17 +831,17 @@ On my views, if you like to father them on me; that we must not admitthem is cer Again, truth should be highly valued; if, as we were saying, a lieis useless to the gods, and useful only as a medicine to men, thenthe use of such medicines should be restricted to physicians; privateindividuals have no business with them." "Summary: The text discusses the idea that famous men should not be depicted as lamenting or expressing grief, in order to set a positive example for future leaders. Trope: The concept of setting a positive example for future generations Narrative arc: Philosophical argument -Enunciation: Dialogue between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical argument -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Homer, Achilles, Priam -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "If you're going to be famous, for Chrissake, don't go around lamenting about it. It's bad enough to have these jokers write about you after you're dead and gone, without your giving them more rope to hang you with while you're alive."""" Homer had only been trying to make a philosophical point,"" I said. """"He was using Priam as an example of a great man who had come to see the light at the last moment, in spite of everything he'd done in his lifetime."""" Yeah,"" Mac said. ""And what did old Priam do in his lifetime? He went around sticking swords into people."""" And what did Achilles do?"" I asked him. He started killing Trojans right and left from the time he was sixteen years old."" Well, yeah, but he didn't spend all his time moaning about it,"""" Mac said. """"He knew what he wanted and he went after it. He was a fighter. A fighter knows when to fight and when not to fight. If he's any good, that is."""" I thought about that one for a while. ""It's like you said before,"" I told him. ""They were fighting for different reasons. Priam was fighting out of anger and hatred. Achilles was fighting because he believed it was his duty to defend his country."""" Well, sure,"" Mac said. ""Priam was fighting for himself. What else would he be doing? But if you're going to be a great leader, you can't let yourself get wrapped up in your own personal problems. You've got to think about the future of the nation. The welfare of the people comes first. That's why they elected you King, wasn't it?"""" Sure,"" I said. ""I guess so."" It's pretty hard to run a nation when you're spending half your time crying over some dame named Briseis,"" Mac pointed out. """"Even if she was a real looker."""" That's true, too,"" I said. ""But I'm not exactly crying about her now, am I?"""" No, but you were earlier,"" he said. ""You've got to learn to set an example, pal. These other guys are looking at you for guidance, even if they don't know it. They're watching you, waiting to see how you're going to handle things. When they see you acting like a moron, they start thinking maybe being King isn't such a hot idea after all."""" But you said yourself that I had my work cut out,"" I reminded him. ""How can I expect to accomplish anything if I'm constantly under fire from a bunch of snotty-nosed kids who want to take over the kingdom?"""" There's no way you can do it,"" Mac said. ""At least, not unless you become a better man than you are right now. " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "Now we think of these famous men as weeping or being angry, but it is not good for us to see the great ones of the earth in this way. It would be like having a picture of President Eisenhower with his mouth open, showing all his teeth, and tears streaming down his face. We would say it was not dignified; it was not a good example for the next President to see. Now Homer and Vergil and Shakespeare wrote about famous men who had their faults. But that is not the way they should have done. The great leaders of the future will have no faults at all. If we show them in books as having faults it will be bad for them. They will try to imitate the faults instead of the virtues, and then where will we be? So we have decided that in all future stories about famous people they must always show them as happy and satisfied and free from every kind of grief."""" * * * * * Well,"" I said, ""that's certainly an idea. And if you can work it out so the story is interesting it might be worth trying."""" That's what we thought,"" he said. ""And when we were working on this one we got a great idea. We got the idea of making it a detective story. That way we could have the famous man lamenting and being unhappy and angry without hurting the plan."""" * * * * * What plan?"" I asked. He stared at me in silence for some moments. Then he said: """"We are working out a Plan to make everybody happy and satisfied."""" This gave me the creeps, just hearing him say it. I knew what was coming. He went on: You know there are a lot of things that make people unhappy. Jealousy makes people unhappy. If everybody was happy and satisfied jealousy would go away. There would be nothing to be jealous about. Envy would also go away."""" Sure,"" I said. ""I can understand that."" If everybody was happy and satisfied, ambition would disappear,"""" he continued. """"Why should people want to get ahead when they are already getting what they want?"""" Sure,"" I said again. ""That makes sense."" Greed would also disappear,"" he said. ""If everybody was happy and satisfied why should they want more than they have?"""" That does make sense,"" I admitted. Glumly. """"So what's your point?"""" The point is, sir,"" he said solemnly, ""that if everybody was happy and satisfied nobody would commit any crimes!"""" I stood up, feeling cold. """"Are you saying that you've planned to make everybody happy and satisfied?"""" I asked. Yes, sir,"" he said. ""That's exactly what we're planning."""" My God!"" I exclaimed. ""You're planning to make the whole world happy and satisfied?"""" " 34 34 "Clearly not, he said. Then if any one at all is to have the privilege of lying, the rulersof the State should be the persons; and they, in their dealings eitherwith enemies or with their own citizens, may be allowed to lie forthe public good. But nobody else should meddle with anything of thekind; and although the rulers have this privilege, for a private manto lie to them in return is to be deemed a more heinous fault thanfor the patient or the pupil of a gymnasium not to speak the truthabout his own bodily illnesses to the physician or to the trainer,or for a sailor not to tell the captain what is happening about theship and the rest of the crew, and how things are going with himselfor his fellow sailors. Most true, he said. If, then, the ruler catches anybody beside himself lying in the State, Any of the craftsmen, whether he priest or physician or carpenter.he will punish him for introducing a practice which is equally subversiveand destructive of ship or State. @@ -864,15 +864,15 @@ Certainly, he said. In the next place, we must not let them be receivers of gift Certainly not. Neither must we sing to them of Gifts persuading gods, and persuading reverend kings. Neither is Phoenix,the tutor of Achilles, to be approved or deemed to have given hispupil good counsel when he told him that he should take the giftsof the Greeks and assist them; but that without a gift he should notlay aside his anger. Neither will we believe or acknowledge Achilleshimself to have been such a lover of money that he took Agamemnon'sor that when he had received payment he restored the dead body ofHector, but that without payment he was unwilling to do so." "Summary: The text discusses the idea that rulers should be allowed to lie for the good of the State, but private individuals should not. It also explores themes of obedience, temperance, and love of money. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue Active character: Rulers, physicians, trainers, captains, sailors Quoted work: Homer's Iliad -Diegetic time: A few minutes" But if the rulers of States, and physicians, and trainers, and captains, and sailors are allowed to lie for the good of the State, there can be no reason why private individuals should be debarred from telling lies; that is what you may say, will be your answer. A: No, Simmias, there would be a reason; but I shall have to think over it myself, and tell you another time. S: And suppose we were to ask you about this question of obedience, whether it is right to obey the laws of the State in all cases, even when they command us to do what is wrong, and whether we ought to disobey when they enjoin us to do wrong, or not; how should you answer? C: At present, before hearing further arguments, I should answer without hesitation that we ought never to obey him who commands us to do wrong; as we ought never to disobey him who commands what is right. S: But will you not admit another case, too, that there may be actions which are neither right nor wrong, and yet the law may enjoin them upon us, as, for example, to drink a cup of wine when we do not want it, and to eat black broth when we like pork better? Ought we, or ought we not, to obey the law? Or is there no difference between these two cases? C: I think that there is a great difference between them; but I cannot at the moment tell in what the difference is. S: Well then, said Simmias, let us not go on till we have cleared out this point, for we cannot any longer doubt that we are in a puzzle; and therefore having made it clear, let us return after this digression to the question, whether temperance is virtue, now that we are better able to see the meaning of the question in general terms. C: You are quite right; but let us try to understand what is the nature of temperance, and then the other points will follow more readily. S: Yes, that is what we ought to do; temperance is certainly an excellent thing with which to begin. C: To be sure. S: Tell me then, he said, what is the nature of temperance, for I cannot remember. Do you mean that temperance is doing our own business, and leaving other people to mind their own affairs? C: That is one sort of temperance which has been introduced into poetry. S: Then again, there is another sort of temperance which is seen in the friendship of man and God; for he who is truly the friend of the god, and is being initiated into any nature of wisdom, does his own work, and leaves gods and intelligences to do theirs; he knows that when men do what the gods ought to have done, and gods do what the business of men is, then there is an awful confusion of duties, and religion is thrown into disorder. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "Yes, and you're wrong in that too. If rulers were allowed to tell lies for the good of the State, there'd be no need of so many spies and detectives and policemen and informers, and such like reptiles."""" Not a bit of it,"" I said. ""The State would employ more spies than ever, just to find out who was lying and who wasn't. But suppose we grant that your notion's right; where does that get us? It still leaves us with the question whether private individuals ought to lie or not. What do you say about that?"""" Oh, that's an easy one,"" he says. ""Private individuals oughtn't to tell lies under any circumstances whatever, because if they did they wouldn't have any peace of mind afterwards. But then, if you think about it, that brings us back to the old question, because if rulers told lies themselves, why, then private individuals would have no reason to tell 'em, would they?"""" That's true enough, but the idea is quite absurd,"" I said. ""It can't be carried out in practice. You see, even granting that a ruler might sometimes tell a lie for the good of the State, still that doesn't mean that he can always do it. He must be able to distinguish between cases when it's right to lie and cases when it isn't. There must be some sort of test by which he can judge. And this test will be as much a rule for him as it is for private individuals. In other words, every man, whether a ruler or not, must have some general principle to guide him in his conduct. It can't be left to chance. Otherwise we should be living in an utter state of confusion."""" No doubt that's true,"" he says. ""But what I'm driving at is something quite different. I want to show you how an ordinary man like myself may sometimes gain a great advantage over a ruler by following his own judgment and disregarding the rules laid down for the general guidance of mankind."""" And then he went on to tell me a story. [Illustration] A BEGGAR AND HIS MASTER After supper I had a talk with my landlady about her business affairs, and I found she was a very shrewd woman. She has a boarder named Morrel, a clerk in the bank of Blum, who pays her fourteen francs a month, and from time to time gives her various presents of food and clothing. The other day he gave her half a pound of meat, and told her he had got it out of a basket. This rather surprised her, and she asked him what he meant by a basket. He said: 'Why, the dead-house.' " 35 35 "Undoubtedly, he said, these are not sentiments which can be approved. Loving Homer as I do, I hardly like to say that in attributing thesefeelings to Achilles, or in believing that they are truly to him,he is guilty of downright impiety. As little can I believe the narrativeof his insolence to Apollo, where he says, Thou hast wronged me, O far-darter, most abominable of deities. VerilyI would he even with thee, if I had only the power, or his insubordinationto the river-god, on whose divinity he is ready to lay hands; or hisoffering to the dead Patroclus of his own hair, which had been previouslydedicated to the other river-god Spercheius, and that he actuallyperformed this vow; or that he dragged Hector round the tomb of Patroclus,and slaughtered the captives at the pyre; of all this I cannot believethat he was guilty, any more than I can allow our citizens to believethat he, the wise Cheiron's pupil, the son of a goddess and of Peleuswho was the gentlest of men and third in descent from Zeus, was sodisordered in his wits as to be at one time the slave of two seeminglyinconsistent passions, meanness, not untainted by avarice, combinedwith overweening contempt of gods and men. @@ -888,15 +888,15 @@ To be sure we shall, he replied. But if you admit that I am right in this, then I grant the truth of your inference. That such things are or are not to be said about men is a questionwhich we cannot determine until we have discovered what justice is,and how naturally advantageous to the possessor, whether he seemsto be just or not. Most true, he said. Enough of the subjects of poetry: let us now speak of the style; andwhen this has been considered, both matter and manner will have beencompletely treated." "Summary: The speaker discusses the impiety of certain actions and narratives attributed to Achilles, as well as the portrayal of gods and heroes in poetry. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The speaker, Homer -Time setting: Contemporary" "Now you have spoken of Achilles. But in the first place, he is not a man of your type: he was no fighter for pay, no ordinary soldier, but a young gentleman who had been brought up in a palace, and so perhaps might be supposed to understand how to behave himself. Next, you are wrong in saying that his actions were impious: it was not impious for him to kill Hector in battle, nor even for him to drag his body about by the heels; as for stripping him naked and treading on him and throwing mud at him, why, these things did not matter in the least: they were only done for fun, and were quite justifiable if there was nothing else to do. What was impious was what Priam did when he came to ask for the body back again: then Homer shows up Achilles as a regular old blackguard, for instead of giving the poor old man the body at once he kept him waiting outside all night until the sun was well up, and then made him beg for it and say pretty please and thankyou into the bargain."""" Well,"" said my friend, ""if I remember rightly, Achilles did give him the body after this; whereupon Priam thanked him and went away."""" Yes,"" I replied, ""and I suppose he went away cursing his luck and swearing that Achilles was the greatest blackguard alive. But never mind Achilles now. What I want to speak to you about is Homer himself. " +Time setting: 1950s" “I don’t know what I did or didn’t do to deserve it, but every time I read about those gods and heroes of Homer’s in the paper they’re up to some new impiety. They’re as bad as the characters in your detective stories, where nothing will stop them from committing murder, arson, rape, and perjury. You have a filthy mind, sir; you give these gods and heroes all the wrong ideas.” “I’m sorry,” said the patient, “but I cannot agree with you. If you’ll permit me, I will explain to you why you are mistaken.” “Thank you,” I said. “You can begin by telling me why Achilles, who was as brave as he could be, insisted on being so ungrateful to Agamemnon when his sister-in-law had been kidnapped. And why he killed that poor old king of the Pylians just because he wanted his own girl friend back. And why he killed the Trojan prince, Priam’s son, when he came to ask for Hector’s body. He was rude to Apollo, too, and struck him with a spear. And then he cut off Hector’s head and trampled it underfoot.” The psychiatrist smiled at my indignation. “These actions of Achilles’ are certainly not in good taste,” he conceded. “But if you will permit me, I will explain to you their real significance. They illustrate the unspeakable insolence of youth toward age. Your father, sir, has never failed to impress upon you the importance of respect for your elders. Well, now, if you can imagine how much more important this is in ancient Greece, you will understand why Achilles behaved exactly as he did.” “That’s all very well,” I replied, “but suppose someone were to write a story about you in which you kicked your own father into the middle of the street? How would you like that?” The psychiatrist’s smile grew broader than ever. “Why, sir,” he said, “I should consider it one of the greatest compliments that anyone could pay me. There is no higher praise of a man than to call him ‘fatherlike.’” “That may be true,” I answered, “but it doesn’t alter the fact that all the men in Homer’s poems are savages.” “Perhaps,” replied the psychiatrist, “you will allow me to point out that savages are not necessarily immoral. In fact, some of the most moral people in the world are still living today in absolute savagery. And as for immorality, sir, you forget that some of our best friends are married.” “Yes, I know,” I said, “and they are doing everything they can to make divorce legal. It isn’t right for them to persecute poor widows in order to get possession of other people’s wives. 36 36 "I do not understand what you mean, said Adeimantus. Then I must make you understand; and perhaps I may be more intelligibleif I put the matter in this way. You are aware, I suppose, that allmythology and poetry is a narration of events, either past, present,or to come? Certainly, he replied. And narration may be either simple narration, or imitation, or a unionof the two? That again, he said, I do not quite understand. I fear that I must be a ridiculous teacher when I have so much difficultyin making myself apprehended. Like a bad speaker, therefore, I willnot take the whole of the subject, but will break a piece off in illustrationof my meaning. You know the first lines of the Iliad, in which thepoet says that Chryses prayed Agamemnon to release his daughter, andthat Agamemnon flew into a passion with him; whereupon Chryses, failingof his object, invoked the anger of the God against the Achaeans.Now as far as these lines, @@ -908,15 +908,15 @@ Of course. Then in this case the narrative of the poet may be said to proceedby Very true. Or, if the poet everywhere appears and never conceals himself, thenagain the imitation is dropped, and his poetry becomes simple narration.However, in order that I may make my meaning quite clear, and thatyou may no more say, I don't understand,' I will show how the changemight be effected. If Homer had said, 'The priest came, having hisdaughter's ransom in his hands, supplicating the Achaeans, and aboveall the kings;' and then if, instead of speaking in the person ofChryses, he had continued in his own person, the words would havebeen, not imitation, but simple narration. The passage would haverun as follows (I am no poet, and therefore I drop the metre), 'Thepriest came and prayed the gods on behalf of the Greeks that theymight capture Troy and return safely home, but begged that they wouldgive him back his daughter, and take the ransom which he brought,and respect the God. Thus he spoke, and the other Greeks revered thepriest and assented. But Agamemnon was wroth, and bade him departand not come again, lest the staff and chaplets of the God shouldbe of no avail to him --the daughter of Chryses should not be released,he said --she should grow old with him in Argos. And then he toldhim to go away and not to provoke him, if he intended to get homeunscathed. And the old man went away in fear and silence, and, whenhe had left the camp, he called upon Apollo by his many names, remindinghim of everything which he had done pleasing to him, whether in buildinghis temples, or in offering sacrifice, and praying that his good deedsmight be returned to him, and that the Achaeans might expiate histears by the arrows of the god,' --and so on. In this way the wholebecomes simple narrative. I understand, he said. Or you may suppose the opposite case --that the intermediate passagesare omitted, and the dialogue only left. That also, he said, I understand; you mean, for example, as in tragedy." "Summary: The speaker is trying to explain the concept of narration and imitation in poetry. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation Active character: Adeimantus, the speaker Quoted work: The Iliad -Diegetic time: A few minutes" “I’ve been trying to make you understand the meaning of narration and imitation in poetry.” “Yes, I remember now,” said Adeimantus. “But why can’t a poet describe events that are truly beautiful without describing ugly things also?” “It’s because he has to be true to his art,” said the speaker. “He has to depict everything as it really is, otherwise his poem will have no credibility. If he only described beauty, then people would think he was just being sentimental or patronizing. And if he described ugliness, they’d think he was just being realistic. So he must do both, and that way his work becomes more credible.” The speaker took another sip of his drink. “A poet must not only tell about what is beautiful and ugly, but he must also imitate every kind of character, even characters that are base and worthless. By doing this, he can show us the difference between good and bad and teach us how to behave.” “Yes, I understand now,” said Adeimantus. “But still, it doesn’t seem right to me for a poet to portray such disgusting things.” The speaker smiled. “You’re right, my friend, and there are some poets who avoid describing these things altogether. But Homer is different. He’s like a doctor who shows the worst diseases so that we can recognize them and avoid them.” “I see,” said Adeimantus. “But what about when a poet describes something that actually happened? Can he use his imagination then?” “Yes, but only within certain limits,” said the speaker. “For example, let’s say a character is described as wearing a red tunic. If the poet changes that to a blue tunic, then the audience will notice and it won’t be believable. But if he changes the color to purple, which is similar to red, then it’s fine. It’s the same with other details. A poet can change small things, but not major ones, otherwise it won’t be believable.” “I understand,” said Adeimantus. “So, does that mean a poet should always try to be faithful to the original text?” “No, not always,” said the speaker. “Sometimes he can improve on it. For example, let’s say the original text says that someone is angry, but the poet knows that they are actually envious. In that case, he should describe the character as envious instead of angry, because that will give a more accurate portrayal of their emotions.” “That makes sense,” said Adeimantus. “But what about when a poet is writing about gods or heroes? Should he portray them as they really were, or should he idealize them?” “He should do both,” said the speaker. “He should show their strengths and weaknesses, but also their greatness and nobility.” The speaker took another sip of his drink. “There’s one more thing I want to talk to you about. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" You cannot be told in a word, nor will you understand it if it is told. If we had never seen the stars, or the sun by day, or the moon by night, could we ever have imagined them?” Adeimantus laughed and said: “I am still more puzzled where I cannot follow you; for how can there be any imitation of virtue or vice at all? Do you not think that the same art which paints one class of things may paint another? Or are there two arts?” “Not at all,” he replied, “as I shall now attempt to explain. Imagine, then, that you wish to imitate the figure of a man in painting: first you would describe to the painter the nature of man, and then you would tell him that ‘the man whom you want him to portray is tall and ruddy with powers of speech and action; his eye is blue and his hair dark.’ ” “Certainly,” he said. “And suppose you were unable to tell the painter what sort of colour to put on his hair, but said to him, ‘Make the man’s hair as like mine as you can,’ would you expect the painter to produce a likeness of yourself?” “Yes, he would be stupid indeed.” “Then you want the painter to lay on the colours on head and body as your own are laid on?” “Certainly.” “Well then, suppose that you are in good health and the man whom you desire to be painted is feverish, and both in colour and appearance he is as unlike you as it is possible to conceive,—will you allow the painter to make an imitation of you out of him?” “Certainly not,” he replied; “in that case I should say that he was only making his picture something like, but not like myself.” “Why, think you,” said I, “that painters who are ill themselves always take care to have their patients stand before them when they are painting their portraits, in order that the colouring may be more natural?” “Yes, they do that,” he said. “And will not poets and storytellers act in the same way? When they are composing stories will not bad poets take their characters as they can get them, and work them into their tales, but a good poet will look for a mind as far as may be like his own, so that the character may be like himself, and after the pattern of this mind he will fashion his image.” “Why, yes, he will,” he said. “Then you must also grant this point, my friend, that bad poets take their characters from any source and any sort of character they can get, and that good poets only take those which are suitable and akin to themselves, having ones of their own sort always in store?” “That,” he said, “is undoubtedly what good poets do.” “Then he who has no goodness in him will be incapable of imitating another who is good; but he who is of a good nature, and virtuous, will have the greatest ease and freedom in representing the character of man;—this will be his peculiar gift of Nature, no less than comedy to one who is humorous, and tragedy to another who is of a tragic turn.” 37 37 "You have conceived my meaning perfectly; and if I mistake not, whatyou failed to apprehend before is now made clear to you, that poetryand mythology are, in some cases, wholly imitative --instances ofthis are supplied by tragedy and comedy; there is likewise the oppositestyle, in which the my poet is the only speaker --of this the dithyrambaffords the best example; and the combination of both is found inepic, and in several other styles of poetry. Do I take you with me? Yes, he said; I see now what you meant. I will ask you to remember also what I began by saying, that we haddone with the subject and might proceed to the style. Yes, I remember. In saying this, I intended to imply that we must come to an understandingabout the mimetic art, --whether the poets, in narrating their stories,are to be allowed by us to imitate, and if so, whether in whole orin part, and if the latter, in what parts; or should all imitationbe prohibited? @@ -934,14 +934,14 @@ Yes, certainly, he said. Then, I said, we will not allow those for whom we profe Very right, he said. Neither must they represent slaves, male or female, performing theoffices of slaves?" "Summary: The speaker and their interlocutor discuss the use of imitation in poetry and its potential impact on the guardians of a state. Trope: The concept of imitating characters and actions as a reflection of one's own behavior Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Enlightenment -Active character: The speaker, Adeimantus" I said: 'When a man has gone into a number of experiences, and each experience has left an impression in him, and the sum of these impressions is called his character, then he may imitate any action which he has experienced; but no one who has not had the experience can be asked to give an imitation of it.' 'Very true,' he said. 'And now for another step forward, Adeimantus; I have told you what imitation is, and also what are the differences among the various kinds of imitations: shall I tell you the threefold division of the art of poetry?' 'By all means,' I replied. 'You know already that some poetry is narrative, some dramatic, and that these two differ from one another.' 'The third species of imitative poetry,' he said, 'is a mixture of the two, and the poets whom we call comic dramatists make use of both.' 'Yes,' I said, 'they are the third class.' 'Can you tell me their object?' 'Their object is clearly to amuse us.' 'And music and dancing and song are, as we were saying, to be used only for pleasure?' 'Certainly,' he said. 'Then, if this be true, we shall admit mother-wit and playful intelligence, without the accompanying qualities of a Guardian of the State, to the lower class, which we have reserved for them.' 'Very good,' he said. 'Then now would be the time to fix their limits.' 'At the same time, Glaucon,' I said, 'we ought not to let them have the whole of their desire.' 'Why not?' 'Because they interpret the laughter which is caused by comedy to be the marks of a cheerful disposition; and they see that people who laugh at such things are highly esteemed among mankind.' 'They certainly are.' 'But when a serious and virtuous man begins to laugh at such things, they are ashamed of him.' 'True.' 'For laughter, as I imagine, ought always to be accompanied by a sort of joy.' 'Yes, by a pleasant sort of joy.' 'And this sort of joy, as I was about to say, becomes proper to a man of virtue, and to a state which is well organized and to a soul which is refined; to the ignorant man of the lower class, and to the city which is ignorant and ill-ordered, laughter is entirely inappropriate.' 'No argument is needed to prove this,' he said. 'But when a man who is of a serious nature falls into laughing fits, the seriousness of his disposition gets a bad name, and makes him ridiculous instead of earnest.' 'That is very true.' 'Then again one of two things must happen: either he will cease from laughing like other men, or he will become like them.' 'He cannot avoid doing one of these two things.' 'So, my noble friend,' I said, 'if you wish to take the field against your enemies in the cause of true philosophy, let laughter, and every jesting style of discourse, be utterly banished from your discourses; and if you do not, I fear that our enemies will be many; laughter will be on their side, while lamentation will be on ours.' 'Noble shall be the victory, and equally remote from hatred and ridicule,' he said. +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: The speaker, Adeimantus" "Look at him. Imitation is the handmaid of self-control, and therefore of justice and temperance of which no man is perfectly possessed who has not had an eye to imitate all his life."""" And yet he will soon be out of control again."""" Perhaps; but there are degrees; and we know that neither you nor any other man is absolutely perfect."""" No; and as the saying goes, the attempt to be so produces Mania."""" Yes, if the attempt is forcibly restrained by some overpowering good or evil, as, for instance, fear of imprisonment or of scandal may modify the actions of a tyrant; but where there are no such opposing forces, then the person is only half himself; he has one side rigidly fixed and the other side unregulated; he has become divided against himself and has, as they say, """"lost his soul."""" I quite understand, and accept your rule of imitation, though not your language. I cannot agree that after all it matters whether a man can imitate anything."""" Why, has not the imitator a double power of perception?"""" Certainly, he must see the real nature of everything which he imitates."""" Yes, he must have perceived many things before he can imitate them. Where is the man who would dare to move in the presence of true beauty who could not imitate her, either in verse or in prose, or in dance or in song?"""" In that sense I admit that imitation is sweet and serviceable enough. But there is another sense, my dear friend, in which I should fear to trust an imitative nature. The imitative poet, especially when young, ought not to be too completely trusted even in this part of his nature. That he is able to imitate is clear; but why does he give us a bad image of good things, instead of a good image of bad things?"""" A fair question. I am afraid that I do not follow you. " 38 38 "They must not. And surely not bad men, whether cowards or any others, who do thereverse of what we have just been prescribing, who scold or mock orrevile one another in drink or out of in drink or, or who in any othermanner sin against themselves and their neighbours in word or deed,as the manner of such is. Neither should they be trained to imitatethe action or speech of men or women who are mad or bad; for madness,like vice, is to be known but not to be practised or imitated. Very true, he replied. Neither may they imitate smiths or other artificers, or oarsmen, orboatswains, or the like? How can they, he said, when they are not allowed to apply their mindsto the callings of any of these? @@ -956,15 +956,15 @@ That, he said, will be his mode of speaking. These, then, are the two kinds of s That is quite true, he said. Whereas the other requires all sorts of harmonies and all sorts ofrhythms, if the music and the style are to correspond, because thestyle has all sorts of changes. That is also perfectly true, he replied. And do not the two styles, or the mixture of the two, comprehend allpoetry, and every form of expression in words? No one can say anythingexcept in one or other of them or in both together. They include all, he said. And shall we receive into our State all the three styles, or one onlyof the two unmixed styles? or would you include the mixed?" "Summary: The text discusses the types of characters and narratives that should be allowed in a state. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The narrator, the person being spoken to -Time setting: Contemporary" My friend, I will tell you of two kinds of characters which a state ought not to allow; one sort has been described by Homer himself, the other only hinted at by him: he did not make a clean sweep of them, but then he was a poet, and poets, as I imagine, are rather inclined to let them off. The first kind are beings who are in their wits, but too strong for human endurance; they are very numerous, and the majority of them are called statesmen. The second class are the silly ones who can hardly hold a tool. Now the true order of nature would be that the weak should be the servants and the strong have rest from their labours; this, my dear Glaucon, is the right way of setting down the Maker's plan in history. But now the master-craftsmen go barefoot, and the slaves live in every sort of luxury. Formerly, when a man fell into poverty there was no spell which our law knew how to cast over him; now we know one by which his poverty is always spinning threads if he is really poor. Then again, the gods had hard work to keep us from being just; now, when we refuse to pay our debts, or to give back our deposits, we affirm that we gave them to Owen Goldsmith or Tellus the earth, or some such rot, and so escape with a few knocks of the stick. These curious revolutions in the laws may be seen in many instances at Athens, though it cannot be said that we have made any great advance in this direction since the days of Solon. But still, in all probability, we are a good deal better than other States. May I ask you to consider further whether there may not be some men in the world who are fit to be rulers, and others who are only fit to be subjects? Do you think that the founders of your ideal State would have been right in leaving the government in the hands of the first class, and making the second class mere slaves? Would they not rather have endowed both with arms, and ordered them to fight together against their enemies until neither could gain the advantage? And in this struggle both would be whipped and wounded and perhaps the wound of one who was whipped might be fatal. Are we to suppose that the injured and the injurer, having thus fallen in the war, would be separated, - the one going to the world below, and the other to the world above; the one with honours and trophies, having a memorial service in every temple of the State, while the other is thrown out and trampled on like a dead dog? Will not the sons of both sides, when they grow up, recover from their wounds and come together to feast and sacrifice? Will not the sons of the victors bragging of their-sires and praising them to their children and grandchildren, tell of the manner in which they were wounded by their ancestors, and of the bravery and greatness of the work; till their hearers will forget themselves and their enmity, and make common cause with one another and become friends? +Time setting: 1950s" "I am talking about the people who live in the state. They are not beautiful, they do not sing like nightingales, they have no sense of humour and they talk a lot of rubbish. You can't put them into a book. They are just ordinary characters who come and go. And that's all. We don't want them here in our State."""" But why?"" I said. ""Why shouldn't we allow them?"""" Because,"" he replied, ""they are uninteresting. They tell lies and gossip. They have no sense of beauty and they steal things from their neighbours. They always look for something to eat. Their wives are always washing up, their children always playing in the street. They never visit us at home; on the contrary, they always want us to visit them. They are always asking each other for money and borrowing it from one another. They get drunk every evening and then they quarrel and beat each other up. Their houses are dirty and smelly. They are always getting ill and when they are ill they want someone else to look after them and give them medicine. When they die they make a noise about it and take up a lot of room in the graveyard. If they see anything new or different they want to know what it is and where it came from. They always go about with their mouths open and whatever they have in their mouths they chew it. When you speak to them they interrupt you because they think they know everything and they never listen to what you say. They don't read books and they don't go to the theatre or concerts. They are afraid of ghosts and they believe in the devil. They are always looking for some excuse to have a row with their neighbours. They are always having rows with their wives and hitting them about the face and head until they faint."""" Then why do you live among them?"" I asked. Well,"" he said, ""we live here because we have to live somewhere. There is nowhere else we can go. Besides, these people are useful to us. They work hard and pay us rent. They also bring us money. They give us presents when they are invited to our house. They borrow money from us and never repay it. When they fall ill we let them stay in our house until they are better. If they are cold we give them blankets. If they are hungry we give them food. If they are thirsty we give them drink. If they are sick we send them to the doctor. If they are old and cannot work any longer we send them to the hospital. If they are dead we bury them. If they want to have a wedding we marry them. If they want to get divorced we divorce them. If they want to be christened we christen them. If they want to be baptised we baptise them. If they want to be confirmed we confirm them. If they want to be ordained we ordain them. If they want to be married we marry them. If they want to be buried we bury them. " 39 39 "I should prefer only to admit the pure imitator of virtue. Yes, I said, Adeimantus, but the mixed style is also very charming:and indeed the pantomimic, which is the opposite of the one chosenby you, is the most popular style with children and their attendants,and with the world in general. I do not deny it. But I suppose you would argue that such a style is unsuitable to ourState, in which human nature is not twofold or manifold, for one manplays one part only? @@ -983,14 +983,14 @@ These then, I said, must be banished; even to women who have a characterto maint In the next place, drunkenness and softness and indolence are utterlyunbecoming the character of our guardians. Utterly unbecoming. And which are the soft or drinking harmonies? The Ionian, he replied, and the Lydian; they are termed 'relaxed.' Well, and are these of any military use? Quite the reverse, he replied; and if so the Dorian and the Phrygianare the only ones which you have left." "Summary: The speaker discusses different styles of music and their suitability for a specific state. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation Active character: Adeimantus, Glaucon -Quoted work: Not mentioned" Die Griechen haben immerhin einen armen Teufel, der als Gott bejammern mu. Adeimantus: Und das ist ein Schelm, der die ganze Musik des Tempels zerstrt und alle Tanzfiguren des Heiligtums verkehrt hat! Glaucon: Wohl mir, da ich nicht in der Musik die Erscheinung des Gtzen sehe, sonst knnte ich von ihm gleichfalls sagen wie du von Phidias' Bildnis: Der Verfertiger ist klger als sein Werk. Adeimantus: Weit du denn, da es mehrere Arten von Musik gibt? Denn eine ist freudig, andere traurig, eine erregt den Mut, eine die Freude zu tnen, eine beruhigt, eine wirft uns in Schlaf, eine weckt auf, eine lockert die Muskeln, eine strkt sie, eine regt das Blut an, eine macht es stocken, eine heit den Magen an, eine erleichtert ihn. Glaucon: Nun ja, so gib acht, da das Lied, das du zum Tischgesprch vorbestimmst, dem ganzen Staat gem und zu seinem Besten sei. Adeimantus: Das wahrhaft Gute wird wohl nach allen diesen Gesetzen sich richten; doch, was das Wrde angeht, so mgen wir von der Musik ganz anders reden. Denn die rechte Musik ist jene, die, wenn man hren mag, auch darber nachdenken kann, welche Botschaft ihr der Dichter mitgeteilt hat. Darin aber werden sich zwei Unterschiede offenbaren. Eine Melodie wird fr sich genommen mit der ganzen Kraft der Erinnerung in uns wirken, oder sie wird uns nur dann beleben, wenn wir wieder und wieder hren, da sie in ihrem Einflusse erlahmt. Also unterscheiden wir die dauernde Musik von der flchtigen, die ewig neue, von der durchgegangenen. So wird jetzt die Musik der Hellenen unsers Staats entsprechend sein, wenn sie, wie gesagt, auf die Nhere hinweist und uns zur Ruhe kommen, nicht aber aufwachen hilft, indem sie immerfort die alte Empfindung neu erschafft. Doch noch ein anderes wird sich uns zeigen, da einige Melodien ganz rein gefat sind, die aber in einem schlechten Vers gestellt werden, und andre vollkommen unmglich sind, wenn man sie in einen guten Vers setzt. So z.B., es gibt schnes Gedicht, aber ungeeignete Melodie dazu, oder umgekehrt. Auch werden wir oft finden, da bei gleichen Worten die eine Melodie besser zu ihnen paet als die andere. Also zuletzt unterscheiden wir die gut geformte Musik von der falschen. Glaucon: Das war ein groer Sprung, den du gemacht hast, mein Freund, wenn du den Geist der Musik so sehr vertiefst, da er nunmehr nicht mehr nur den Klang des Tones, sondern auch den Sinn der Worte begreift und frhlt. Ich glaube zwar, da die richtige Dichtkunst darauf abzielt, die Musik genau zu verstehen; doch bin ich weit entfernt, zu behaupten, da die Musiker die Kunst des Dichtens grndlich erforscht haben. Da man nun diese beiden Reiche nicht nacheinander, sondern gleichzeitig zu begreifen voraussetzt, glaube ich, ist ein unbegrenztes Ansehen, das dir keineswegs zusteht. Adeimantus: Du hast recht, und hier liegt unser aller Fehler. Wenn ein Dichter einmal eine gute Melodie geschaffen, so meint er, da er nun von der Arbeit frei sei, und schickt seine Verse zu den Sngerinnen, wo es einem alten Xanthia, der schon viele Jahrhunderte lange in diesem Geschfte ist, berlstet, ob die Melodie zu den Worten paet. +Quoted work: Not mentioned" Adeimantus, welcher ein wenig rhrte, fragte: Wie kann das sein? Der Gesang der Fltote ist doch so schn und sinnig. Sokrates lachte laut auf: Schn und sinnig! Das sind die heutigen Worte fr mglich. In alten Zeiten aber nannten wir solche Dichter wie Homer mglich, und wirklich sind seine Gedichte schn und sinnig genug; sie erfreuen und unterhalten uns in dem Maße, worin man sich erheitern lassen kann, ohne den Kopf zu verlieren. Wir haben daheim hier eine Art von Musik, die ich nicht leiden kann; sie hat einen trocknen, eintnbigen Klang, ist irgendwie hart, unlieblich, feindlich, eine Art von Schrei, der mich stachelt, und alsobald werden die Zge steif, die Stirne falten sich, die Augenbrauen zusammenziehen, die Arme wuchsen, und wenn es nicht so furchbar wrde, wrde ich hassen, ja mich sogar wehren mssen gegen diese Musik. Aber andere Leute lieben sie, und wenn sie mit ihr beschftigt sind, wird ihnen ganz schwarz um die Augen, sie verndernde ihre Meinung, durchdringen alles bis in die tiefsten Abgrnde ihres Wesens, und wenn sie sie lange genug hren, dann rufen sie aus: Dieses ist Gerechtigkeit, das ist Gerechtigkeit! und versichern, dass es so nun einmal sei und nichts anderes sein knne. Es ist also nicht wunderbar, wenn diese Leute nicht weitersehen wollen, weil sie der Staat so aussehen soll, wie sie ihn zu sehen gewohnt sind, und dabei nicht an die Richtigkeit ihrer Vorstellungen denkt. Wenn sie aber jemals bereinstimmung finden zwischen ihrer Musik und ihren Vorgaben, dann ist das ein glckliches Ereignis, bei dem wir, wie es scheint, zusehen mssen, obwohl es uns sonst sehr ungelegen kommen mag. Und nun rate ich Euch, meine Freunde, da Ihr euch auf die rechte Musik besinnt, denn ihr gesunde Geist und Leib, ihr eure Seele und euer ganzes Wesen. Denn die Begabungen der Menschen sind verschieden, und daher ist es auch notwendig, da die verschiedene Einrichtungen entstehen, die uns die Lebenskunst lehren. Jeder mu seine eigene Musik pflegen, die ihm ntzt, die seinen Geschmack und seinen Geist sttigt und ihn frs Leben befriedigt. Doch soll er nicht nur die Musik pflegen, sondern auch alle anderen Kunstwerke, whrend er doch seiner Arbeit nachgeht, die ihn vor allem zu ernhren und zu bewahren pflegt. Denn es ist ntzlich, alles zu genieen, was ntzlich ist, und dabei seine Tugenden zu pflegen und zu mehren, und er wird das tun, wenn er immer daran denkt, wie er seine eigene Musik macht und welche Wirkungen sie auf die Seele hat. Damit beruhigte Sokrates Glaukon, der nun wieder gut gelaunt fortfuhr: Ich habe noch eine Frage, mein Freund. Warum habt Ihr die Schauspielkunst beiseite gelassen? Sie ist doch sehr ntzlich, wenn sie richtig gemacht wird, und es gibt viele Tugenden, die durch sie gefrdert und gepflegt werden knnen. 40 40 "I answered: Of the harmonies I know nothing, but I want to have onewarlike, to sound the note or accent which a brave man utters in thehour of danger and stern resolve, or when his cause is failing, andhe is going to wounds or death or is overtaken by some other evil,and at every such crisis meets the blows of fortune with firm stepand a determination to endure; and another to be used by him in timesof peace and freedom of action, when there is no pressure of necessity,and he is seeking to persuade God by prayer, or man by instructionand admonition, or on the other hand, when he is expressing his willingnessto yield to persuasion or entreaty or admonition, and which representshim when by prudent conduct he has attained his end, not carried awayby his success, but acting moderately and wisely under the circumstances,and acquiescing in the event. These two harmonies I ask you to leave;the strain of necessity and the strain of freedom, the strain of theunfortunate and the strain of the fortunate, the strain of courage,and the strain of temperance; these, I say, leave. And these, he replied, are the Dorian and Phrygian harmonies of whichI was just now speaking. Then, I said, if these and these only are to be used in our songsand melodies, we shall not want multiplicity of notes or a panharmonicscale? @@ -1005,14 +1005,14 @@ But, indeed, he replied, I cannot tell you. I only know that thereare some three Then, I said, we must take Damon into our counsels; and he will tellus what rhythms are expressive of meanness, or insolence, or fury,or other unworthiness, and what are to be reserved for the expressionof opposite feelings. And I think that I have an indistinct recollectionof his mentioning a complex Cretic rhythm; also a dactylic or heroic,and he arranged them in some manner which I do not quite understand,making the rhythms equal in the rise and fall of the foot, long andshort alternating; and, unless I am mistaken, he spoke of an iambicas well as of a trochaic rhythm, and assigned to them short and longquantities. Also in some cases he appeared to praise or censure themovement of the foot quite as much as the rhythm; or perhaps a combinationof the two; for I am not certain what he meant. These matters, however,as I was saying, had better be referred to Damon himself, for theanalysis of the subject would be difficult, you know. Rather so, I should say. But there is no difficulty in seeing that grace or the absence ofgrace is an effect of good or bad rhythm. None at all. And also that good and bad rhythm naturally assimilate to a good andbad style; and that harmony and discord in like manner follow style;for our principle is that rhythm and harmony are regulated by thewords, and not the words by them." "Summary: The narrator discusses the use of harmonies and rhythms in music and their connection to different aspects of life. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy -Active character: Narrator, interlocutor" "I'll bet that you're going to say next that the same harmonies and rhythms that make for fine music also make for fine living."""" Well, I was going to say just that,"" said the narrator. ""But it's a good deal more than that. The Greek myth of Mars and Venus is a symbolic statement of the relationship between war and love in human life. Warlike Mars represents the active principle in the universe; Venus represents the passive principle. Together they represent the whole of life. Now, harmony and rhythm are both symbols of the balance and order which makes possible all forms of creation. And when I look at the world as it is today I find that our way of making money produces a great deal of disharmony and chaos. It seems to me that those who have the greatest wealth live lives that are utterly devoid of rhythm and harmony. As a result, their lives produce nothing but discordant sounds. They shout and scream at each other with the most vulgar language. They seem to be out of tune with everything and everybody. On the other hand, when I go into the poorest quarters of the city I find people who live their lives in beautiful harmony. No matter how poor they may be they sing and dance and play beautiful music. Their very poverty seems to give them a deeper appreciation of the values of life. They are contented with what they have, and they know how to enjoy it. They laugh easily, and they hate nobody. " +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: Narrator, interlocutor" """""But, yes; let's go on with the music. The harmonies of life are not all major and minor, and if you know how to play them, you can get a lot of fun out of the chromatics. Take the man I've been telling you about who was always getting into trouble because he never could keep his mouth shut. He's had three wives already and each one of them has run out on him, and he always says it's the women that have done wrong. If he'd never opened his mouth he might have had the first two for keeps, but he couldn't help talking, and he always picked the wrong time and place. Now, take another fellow I know who is as quiet as a clam most of the time, and when he does open his mouth everybody laughs at what he says because he's so dumb. But the wife he married twenty years ago still loves him like she did when they were kids, and there isn't a woman in town who would leave him for anything. Well, now, which one of them do you think is more normal?"""" I said I didn't know. """"They're both abnormal,"""" he said, """"but if you want to know which one is the least abnormal, why, it's the dumb one."""" I looked at him in amazement. """"You mean to tell me,"""" I said, """"that a man who doesn't know how to talk is more normal than a man who can't keep his mouth shut?"""" Sure he is,"" he said. ""Why, if he didn't talk at all he wouldn't be any worse than a vegetable. And he can't help being dumb because he hasn't got any sense. But the other guy knows better, and yet he talks when he shouldn't. That's where he gets into trouble, because he takes things too far. You see, there's nothing wrong with a man who can't talk at all, but a man who talks when he oughtn't to is bad news."" Well, that was a new one on me, and I began to wonder if everything that this guy knew wasn't the other side of the coin from what I'd learned myself. It seemed to me that life was complicated enough without having to worry about whether people talked too much or too little; and just then, when I had my hands full trying to find out who killed Milt Lonergan, here was this detective giving me something else to think about. But maybe there was something in what he said, because you could see it worked out in music. Take a slow waltz. If you played the melody right through by itself it would sound pretty dull, but when you added the harmony it came alive and you could dance to it. And if you played the rhythm alone it would make your feet move even if you weren't dancing, and when you put the melody over the harmony and the rhythm together they sounded swell. " 41 41 "Just so, he said, they should follow the words. And will not the words and the character of the style depend on thetemper of the soul? Yes. And everything else on the style? Yes. Then beauty of style and harmony and grace and good rhythm dependon simplicity, --I mean the true simplicity of a rightly and noblyordered mind and character, not that other simplicity which is onlyan euphemism for folly? Very true, he replied. And if our youth are to do their work in life, must they not makethese graces and harmonies their perpetual aim? @@ -1024,15 +1024,15 @@ Just as in learning to read, I said, we were satisfied when we knewthe letters o True -- Or, as we recognise the reflection of letters in the water, or ina mirror, only when we know the letters themselves; the same art andstudy giving us the knowledge of both: Exactly -- Even so, as I maintain, neither we nor our guardians, whom we haveto educate, can ever become musical until we and they know the essentialforms, in all their combinations, and can recognise them and theirimages wherever they are found, not slighting them either in smallthings or great, but believing them all to be within the sphere ofone art and study." "Summary: The text discusses the importance of beauty and harmony in art and education. Trope: Beauty as a reflection of goodness -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Classical philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Glaucon, the speaker -Time setting: Contemporary" """""The world of forms and ideas is the only thing that has beauty and reality, the other is a mere copy of it, a shadow; so art must be the same, a copy of the eternal ideas."""" Glaucon did not seem to understand this very clearly, but he had a vague impression that it was all right. Then I went on: """"We said that knowledge was better than ignorance, didn't we?"""" Yes."" And also that virtue was better than vice?"" Of course."" Well, then, what is true knowledge? Isn't it knowledge of the real being of things?"" Yes."" And what is the real being of anything?"" The form or idea which it resembles, isn't it?"" That's what you were just saying."" But now look here,"" I went on, ""doesn't the good man resemble the god in his soul and disposition? He is gentle and self-controlled, just and pious; he can't do wrong or harm to anyone; he is always calm and happy, and nothing disturbs him. Isn't that so?"""" Certainly,"" said Glaucon. ""That is the nature of the god and of the good man."" Now consider how the education of such a one should proceed; suppose we take up the subject again from the beginning. If the gods are worthy of honour and love, it is because they are beautiful and good, and therefore their works must be such too. And if we examine these works more closely we shall find that each of them is as perfect as possible, since perfection belongs to their creators. Thus the heaven is perfect, and earth too, and everything which has come into being out of earth, and everything which grows out of the earth, for all these are the work of gods. Therefore all things ought to be treated with reverence and piety; the gods, our parents, and ourselves, and the animals, and the whole universe itself. But if we are going to treat these last with respect, we must have some clear conception of their nature; otherwise we shall fail to honour them as we ought. " +Time setting: 1950s" "I'll bet you any money I choose, that if we do ever find the corpse it will be a woman; and that it will be found in bed. She was just a woman who had never learned to be good for anything but that."""" Glaucon made no answer to this rather harsh and vivid speech, but sat quietly smoking his pipe. And now,"" continued the speaker, when he saw that he had said all that he meant to say upon the matter, """"now listen to me again, and you shall have some more philosophy."""" He leaned back in his chair with a satisfied air of having got through something disagreeable, and looked at Glaucon. The other remained motionless, save only that he took one last puff from his pipe before he laid it down beside him on the table. You know as well as I do, Glaucon, that art is the most important part of education, and that it must come first. Without beauty how can goodness be seen?"""" Yes, yes,"" said Glaucon; ""but what has this to do with the case?"""" Much, my friend, very much. For I am going to tell you why beauty is so necessary to goodness. First, because beauty means harmony, and harmony means order, and order means law. That is why the Greeks were always great lawyers, and great lovers of law; they were lovers of beauty, and therefore of order and of reason. Second, because the greatest beauty is the beauty of youth, and youth is the time of strength, and strength is power; therefore beauty is power, and so is the same thing as goodness. Third, because beauty is like goodness; it is everywhere the same: if you see a beautiful face or a beautiful flower, you are sure that it is good; and if you see a good man or a good action, you are sure that it is beautiful. Therefore beauty is a help to goodness, because it makes us love goodness. Fourth, because beauty is eternal, and goodness is eternal, and therefore they are the same thing; there is nothing else in the world which lasts, except the divine life of God. Fifth, because goodness is God, and God is love, and love is beauty. These five reasons prove to me that beauty is the same as goodness, and that therefore whatever is beautiful is also good; and since God is the best and the highest of beings, the highest beauty must be the beauty of God. And this proves to me, Glaucon, that the greatest artist must be the greatest lover of God, and that therefore he will paint what he sees most clearly in the light of truth; and thus he will paint God. Therefore, the greatest work of art is the picture of God. You will ask me next what sort of picture it will be; and I reply that it will be the most beautiful picture that can possibly be painted; and then you will ask me if it is possible for anyone to paint such a picture; and I reply that it is quite possible, and that it has been painted already by several artists, though not with perfect success; " 42 42 "Most assuredly. And when a beautiful soul harmonises with a beautiful form, and thetwo are cast in one mould, that will be the fairest of sights to himwho has an eye to see it? The fairest indeed. And the fairest is also the loveliest? That may be assumed. And the man who has the spirit of harmony will be most in love withthe loveliest; but he will not love him who is of an inharmonioussoul? That is true, he replied, if the deficiency be in his soul; but ifthere be any merely bodily defect in another he will be patient ofit, and will love all the same. @@ -1052,15 +1052,15 @@ Yes, he said; that a guardian should require another guardian to takecare of him But next, what shall we say of their food; for the men are in trainingfor the great contest of all --are they not? Yes, he said. And will the habit of body of our ordinary athletes be suited to them? Why not? I am afraid, I said, that a habit of body such as they have is buta sleepy sort of thing, and rather perilous to health. Do you notobserve that these athletes sleep away their lives, and are liableto most dangerous illnesses if they depart, in ever so slight a degree,from their customary regimen?" "Summary: A conversation about the relationship between beauty, harmony, love, and physical fitness. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The speaker, the person being spoken to -Diegetic time: A few minutes" I’ve got to be back in the city for dinner at eight.” “You’re going to walk, then?” he said. “Yes.” “Where are you stopping now?” She was silent a moment; then she said: “At the—Harmonie.” He raised his eyebrows and looked at her sharply. “You wouldn’t mind if I walked with you a little way?” “No.” “What’s the matter with that? We can talk on the way.” He fell into step beside her, and they went on together in silence. After a few moments he said: “Don’t you think it’s rather cold for you to be walking alone?” “Why shouldn’t I?” “Well, what do you know about this town, anyway?” “I was born here.” “Were you? Well, I don’t blame you for getting out of it as soon as you could. It must be pretty tough when you have to go around picking up pedestrians in the streets.” “If you want to know why I’m walking, it’s because I want to get some exercise. Why aren’t you home having dinner?” “Who says I wasn’t? I just stepped out for a breath of air.” “And you ran into me.” “I did, didn’t I?” There was another silence; then he said, more casually, “That is a swell hotel, isn’t it?” “It’s very nice,” she answered. “Don’t you live there?” “No.” “Are you on the staff?” “No.” He reflected a moment, then asked: “Aren’t you afraid to be walking alone at night?” “Afraid?” “Well, you never can tell.” “There’s nothing to fear.” “That’s right, you’re probably armed.” “I am not.” “Not even a knife?” “No.” “But you’re taking chances.” “I know how to take care of myself.” He nodded approvingly. “I like your spirit. That’s what we need more of nowadays. People who aren’t afraid to stand on their own feet.” She said nothing. They walked along without speaking for a time; then he began again: “Do you know what I think of beauty?” “No.” “I think it’s the most important thing in the world. You have to have beauty, or what’s the point of anything?” She shrugged her shoulders. “Beauty is the only thing that lasts. Everything else changes, but you can always recognize beauty when you see it. That’s something that never dies. If you look at people carefully enough, you can tell all sorts of things by their faces. You can always tell whether they’re really happy, or whether they’re just pretending. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" And yet a beautiful woman can have beauty, and harmony and love in her life, and at the same time be fat, and flabby, and soft. Beauty isn’t physical fitness, even though you might think so. It’s only a symbol of it, just like a rose is a symbol of love. A woman that’s physically fit and has harmony and love in her life will have beauty, even if she’s got a face like a bulldog. A woman with beauty hasn’t got anything except beauty. She may be full of hate and jealousy, and her mind may be full of rotten thoughts and lies; but she’ll always be beautiful because of the beauty. But you haven’t got any beauty to fall back on, you rotten old hag! You’ve got nothing except your physical fitness! And now you’re going to lose that too!” “You . . . you devil!” she screamed. “Keep quiet,” I said, “and listen to what I’m going to tell you. When you first came here I thought you had something. You were tough, and smart, and strong; and your mind was quick, and you knew how to use your brains. I thought you could go places. You could have gone places. But you let yourself get soft. You let yourself get fat and flabby and soft. The more soft you got, the uglier you got. And then you began to hate men, and you couldn’t stand women. You thought they were getting everything, and you were getting nothing. Well, you’re getting nothing now. They’re taking away your money, and your clothes, and your jewels, and all the things you’ve got. And when they’re done with that, they’re going to take away your life.” “I’ll never talk,” she said. “They can do what they please with me.” “You won’t have to talk,” I said. “In an hour or two you’ll be able to talk with your tongue hanging out of your mouth. And if you don’t talk then, you’ll talk when you’re stretched on the electric chair. And after that you’ll talk in hell for all eternity. You understand? Do you want to hear some more?” “No,” she whispered. “Then shut up.” She opened her mouth as if she wanted to say something else, but she didn’t. She looked at me with those great eyes of hers, and the tears started running down her cheeks, and I turned my head away and went over and sat on the couch. In a few minutes I heard her sobbing, and I kept my eyes shut and waited for her to stop. I didn’t want to watch her. After a while she was still, and then I opened my eyes. She was lying on the floor on her side, and she was looking at me, and her face was wet with tears. “Don’t hate me,” she said. “I know it’s wrong. But I can’t help it. I’m scared.” “Get up,” I said. “You can’t stay there.” 43 43 "Yes, I do. Then, I said, a finer sort of training will be required for our warriorathletes, who are to be like wakeful dogs, and to see and hear withthe utmost keenness; amid the many changes of water and also of food,of summer heat and winter cold, which they will have to endure whenon a campaign, they must not be liable to break down in health. That is my view. The really excellent gymnastic is twin sister of that simple musicwhich we were just now describing. How so? Why, I conceive that there is a gymnastic which, like our music, issimple and good; and especially the military gymnastic. @@ -1078,16 +1078,16 @@ Of all things, he said, the most disgraceful. Would you say 'most,' I replied, w Yes, he said, that is still more disgraceful. Well, I said, and to require the help of medicine, not when a woundhas to be cured, or on occasion of an epidemic, but just because,by indolence and a habit of life such as we have been describing,men fill themselves with waters and winds, as if their bodies werea marsh, compelling the ingenious sons of Asclepius to find more namesfor diseases, such as flatulence and catarrh; is not this, too, adisgrace? Yes, he said, they do certainly give very strange and newfangled namesto diseases." "Summary: The speaker discusses the need for a more intense training regime for warriors, focusing on their physical and mental health. Narrative arc: Exposition -Enunciation: First-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Enlightenment +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The speaker, Homer Quoted work: Homer's works -Time setting: Contemporary" And it strikes me that Homer was a very great man, and I am not going to be taken down by him. “I have been thinking over the subject of late and have come to the conclusion that if we are to keep abreast of the times, and stay in the ring as champions of civilization, there is one point in which we must put on flesh. We must make ourselves more muscle-bound, for I perceive that war, instead of growing less fierce, as you might expect with the advance of civilization, is likely to grow fiercer still; and although our enemies at present may be soft, there is no reason to suppose that they will always remain so. The time may come when they will be just as hardy as ourselves, and we shall have to train ourselves accordingly. “Now, what I suggest is this: That we should begin to drill our warriors in the gymnasium from the earliest age, making them do exercises that would develop every part of their bodies until they reach the age of thirty, when we could put them through their last course and then send them into battle. And I should like to see us take up some form of training that would brace their nerve power as well as their muscle-power, for I feel that the strain of modern warfare will tell severely upon the nerves as well as the muscles; and I know of no better exercise than that of the sword dance, which, besides being an admirable form of gymnastics, tends to give a man what the Greeks called thargelia, or fortitude, and keeps his nerves steady under any circumstances.” “It is an excellent suggestion,” said Gray, “and I hope you will put it before the King.” “Yes, I intend doing so,” said Mr. Smithson; “but I would like to go a little further, for I feel that even this is not enough, and that there is something more that we want. In fact, I think that the only way in which we can secure the success of our arms is by trying to develop the physical man, the animal within us, so that he may become dominant over the spiritual man, the human being who has been created in the image of God. “You will remember that the ancient Greek believed that his soul had two antagonists to contend with, the one being the body, the other the devil; and it was his object to defeat both these foes, and so to establish himself in triumph as king over himself. “Now, we moderns are rather apt to forget that we also possess a body which is quite as powerful as the body of the Greek, and one that can, and sometimes does, become equally mischievous. +Time setting: 1950s" "Then there was the slighter man who had taken on the color of a deep-red wine. He was in his early thirties and he was to be found sitting behind a desk with a telephone at his elbow and an automatic at his hip. He spoke in a hard clipped voice that had been known to cut through steel like a diamond, and his eyes were cold and hard and merciless. A year ago I would have said that no man could live and remain whole within such a shell; but I have seen him laugh when the mood came over him, and I know that he has lived for years within that shell and is still alive. No, it wouldn't be too much to say that this is the man who has given us our army of warriors. He is the one who takes the raw material and shapes it to his will. He has made it possible for men to live and work together for a common purpose and obey orders without question. But he did not do it all by himself. It is Homer who furnished him with the raw material. He never goes into the field himself, but he keeps in close touch with everything that happens. The last time I saw him he was lying in the sun by the swimming pool and he looked as if he might have been dead for days except for the bubbles on his lips. He was reading the Iliad aloud to himself, and every now and then he would stop to chuckle or guffaw. I asked him what he thought he was laughing about and he said, 'It's funny, isn't it? Achilles is the best fighter they've got, and he is always getting mad and walking out on the war and sulking. I can't figure out why Agamemnon can't get along without him.'"""" * * * * * * I think we ought to have a more intensive training course,"""" I said. """"We aren't winning because we aren't organized. We aren't organized because we don't have enough leaders who can handle men. And we don't have those kind of leaders because we haven't trained them for the job. The way I see it, the first thing we need is a physical-training program. I don't mean aerobics. I'm talking about real physical strength. You've seen these guys you brought back from the field. They're tired all the time, and their muscles are soft and flabby. And some of them look as if they're half-starved."""" That's right,"" Willis said. ""They eat the same stuff we eat, but they don't seem to put on any weight."""" They don't need to,"" I said. ""I'll bet they can go seventy-two hours without food and still have enough strength to knock off two or three soldiers. Now how many of us could do that?"""" Well, let's face it,"" Willis said. ""We're not soldiers. We've got to draw the line somewhere. " 44 44 "Yes, I said, and I do not believe that there were any such diseasesin the days of Asclepius; and this I infer from the circumstance thatthe hero Eurypylus, after he has been wounded in Homer, drinks a possetof Pramnian wine well besprinkled with barley-meal and grated cheese,which are certainly inflammatory, and yet the sons of Asclepius whowere at the Trojan war do not blame the damsel who gives him the drink,or rebuke Patroclus, who is treating his case. Well, he said, that was surely an extraordinary drink to be givento a person in his condition. Not so extraordinary, I replied, if you bear in mind that in formerdays, as is commonly said, before the time of Herodicus, the guildof Asclepius did not practise our present system of medicine, whichmay be said to educate diseases. But Herodicus, being a trainer, andhimself of a sickly constitution, by a combination of training anddoctoring found out a way of torturing first and chiefly himself,and secondly the rest of the world. @@ -1101,15 +1101,15 @@ He is generally supposed to have nothing to do. Then you never heard of the sayi Nay, he said, I think that he had better begin somewhat sooner. Let us not have a dispute with him about this, I said; but ratherask ourselves: Is the practice of virtue obligatory on the rich man,or can he live without it? And if obligatory on him, then let us raisea further question, whether this dieting of disorders which is animpediment to the application of the mind t in carpentering and themechanical arts, does not equally stand in the way of the sentimentof Phocylides? Of that, he replied, there can be no doubt; such excessive care ofthe body, when carried beyond the rules of gymnastic, is most inimicalto the practice of virtue." "Summary: The text discusses the practice of medicine and its impact on individuals' lives. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation Active character: Asclepius, Eurypylus, Patroclus, Herodicus Quoted work: Homer's Iliad, Phocylides' poem -Time setting: Contemporary" "Then, of course, there are the hypochondriacs and the women who want to be cured of being pretty """" Asclepius interrupted him. """"That's enough of that! If you're going to talk about the practice of medicine in a room full of patients, you may as well go out on the street corner and sell apples."""" Then he turned to Eurypylus. """"I've told you this before,"""" he said. """"Never mind how many times I tell you, you'll forget it. You can't get along with people unless you remember they have feelings. They've got feelings just like you have, only they've got them better camouflaged under their skins so that you don't notice them. And when they start shooting off their mouths, remember they're not saying what they really feel inside. They're either trying to make themselves look good or bad, depending on which way they think they're coming out even. Never let your feelings show. But try to find out how other people feel. A doctor can do more for his patient if he remembers that the patient is sick because he wants something and he's not getting it. He's got something wrong with him, all right, but maybe he could cure himself if he wasn't so damn stubborn."""" Patroclus knew that was true, but he didn't know why it was true. He had learned in school that people were motivated by self-interest, and yet here was Asclepius telling him that other people weren't always thinking about themselves. How could he straighten out his own life if he couldn't figure out why other people acted the way they did? He wished he'd had sense enough to ask Herodicus about these things. He'd been too busy being jealous of Herodicus to pay any attention to what he knew. It wouldn't have done any good, he supposed; Herodicus would never have explained anything clearly to him. After all, Herodicus hadn't explained anything clearly to Phyllis. Phyllis had become an alcoholic after her operation. She had gone back to work at the clinic, but she spent most of her time drinking in the office and taking naps on the couch in the waiting-room. Herodicus had fired her twice, but each time he'd taken her back again. He made no bones about it; he said he couldn't run the place without her. He just wished to hell she wouldn't come to work drunk. When she finally disappeared altogether, he thought it was a godsend. The clinic began to prosper again. But now she had turned up, and Asclepius was asking questions. Patroclus wondered whether he ought to warn Herodicus. Maybe he'd be giving Asclepius away if he did. But he decided he might as well take a chance. After all, Asclepius already knew that Herodicus was living with Phyllis. " +Time setting: 1950s" "At last I said: """"I don't know whether you've noticed it or not, but you talk about medicine as though it were a conspiracy against the human race."""" He smiled. """"I do, don't I?"""" he said. """"I suppose it's because it is."""" Oh?"" I said. ""How so?"" Well,"" he said, ""in a sense, yes; in another sense, no."" How so?"" I said. He held up his hand. """"Wait a minute,"""" he said, """"and I'll tell you an old story."""" The old story,"" I said. ""It was a long time ago. And I didn't really like it much."""" You're right,"" he said, ""it was a long time ago; and that may have had something to do with it. But it's not just a myth, you know, or even only a fable. It actually happened, just the way Homer tells it."""" Oh?"" I said. ""Then what was it?"" It was the story of Asclepius,"" he said, ""the god of medicine."""" Oh,"" I said. ""And what happened to him?"" Just this,"" he said. ""The other gods got tired of having people live forever, so they killed him for giving them the secret of immortality. Isn't that the story?"""" Yes,"" I said. ""That's the story."" Well,"" he said, ""there isn't any God of Medicine now. There's only the doctors."""" Yes,"" I said, ""that's true enough."" And that's why we take such a low view of life,"" he said. ""We practice our profession on dead people. We get our training by killing animals. And when we're finished, we retire from active practice and become professors, where we can go on teaching students how to kill people for the rest of their lives."""" That's pretty harsh, all right,"" I said. ""But then, it isn't altogether true either, is it?"""" Not at all,"" he said. ""But it's a good idea to think it is."""" Why?"" I said. ""Why would you want to make yourself believe that?"" Because,"" he said, ""you'd be crazy if you didn't."" A few days later, after I'd been back in the States awhile, I ran across a book on medicine by somebody named Eurypylus. It seemed to me that it might be the same person who was driving the ambulance over there in Europe, so I opened it up and started reading. Sure enough, it was the same guy. And since I had nothing else to do, I read the book straight through. In the back of it there was a poem by Phocylides. It began like this: If Patroclus were alive today, They'd probably cut off his head; For they say a doctor once applied Some skillful leechcraft to his wound, And lo! Patroclus rose again. " 45 45 "Yes, indeed, I replied, and equally incompatible with the managementof a house, an army, or an office of state; and, what is most importantof all, irreconcilable with any kind of study or thought or self-reflection--there is a constant suspicion that headache and giddiness are tobe ascribed to philosophy, and hence all practising or making trialof virtue in the higher sense is absolutely stopped; for a man isalways fancying that he is being made ill, and is in constant anxietyabout the state of his body. Yes, likely enough. And therefore our politic Asclepius may be supposed to have exhibitedthe power of his art only to persons who, being generally of healthyconstitution and habits of life, had a definite ailment; such as thesehe cured by purges and operations, and bade them live as usual, hereinconsulting the interests of the State; but bodies which disease hadpenetrated through and through he would not have attempted to cureby gradual processes of evacuation and infusion: he did not want tolengthen out good-for-nothing lives, or to have weak fathers begettingweaker sons; --if a man was not able to live in the ordinary way hehad no business to cure him; for such a cure would have been of nouse either to himself, or to the State. Then, he said, you regard Asclepius as a statesman. Clearly; and his character is further illustrated by his sons. Notethat they were heroes in the days of old and practised the medicinesof which I am speaking at the siege of Troy: You will remember how,when Pandarus wounded Menelaus, they @@ -1119,16 +1119,16 @@ All that, Socrates, is excellent; but I should like to put a questionto you: Oug Yes, I said, I too would have good judges and good physicians. Butdo you know whom I think good? Will you tell me? I will, if I can. Let me however note that in the same question youjoin two things which are not the same. How so? he asked. Why, I said, you join physicians and judges. Now the most skilfulphysicians are those who, from their youth upwards, have combinedwith the knowledge of their art the greatest experience of disease;they had better not be robust in health, and should have had all mannerof diseases in their own persons. For the body, as I conceive, isnot the instrument with which they cure the body; in that case wecould not allow them ever to be or to have been sickly; but they curethe body with the mind, and the mind which has become and is sickcan cure nothing." "Summary: The speaker discusses the incompatibility of philosophy with managing a house, an army, or an office. They also criticize doctors who treat unhealthy and intemperate patients. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic dialogue +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, interlocutor Quoted work: Tragedies, Pindar's poetry -Time setting: Contemporary" "At least you can't manage a house, and you know it. What is the use of a philosopher who doesn't even know how to make his own bed?"""" But what,"" said I, ""can one do in such circumstances?"" You can get out of the business altogether, if you like."" How can that be done?"" By going into politics or becoming a doctor; for all men are good at managing something, either a house or an army or a state or a ship, or the management of their own persons. Now philosophy is the most difficult of all these things, and hence philosophers will never be able to manage any of them."""" Surely they must have some knowledge of the other arts, Socrates, otherwise they would not know how to manage anything."" Certainly not, my friend; but what need of such knowledge have they who have already attained wisdom? For wisdom is the greatest of all arts."""" But surely there must be some special kind of virtue for each art, as we might say there are special diseases of each part of the body; so also there must be special virtues for the physician, the general, the householder, the farmer, and the man who looks after his own person. And if this is true, then the wise man will possess a virtue which is peculiar to him; for he alone has attained wisdom."""" It appears so,"" said I. Well, then,"" he said, ""if you suppose that the wise man is good, he cannot be good in respect of any of these other forms of goodness, but only in the peculiar form which belongs to him."""" There is sense in what you say,"" I replied, ""but does not goodness come from virtue?"" Certainly."" And virtue is of two kinds, arethusa1, arethusa2, arethusa3, arethusa4, arethusa5, arethusa6, arethusa7, arethusa8, arethusa9, arethusa10, arethusa11, arethusa12, arethusa13, arethusa14, arethusa15, arethusa16, arethusa17, arethusa18, arethusa19, arethusa20, arethusa21, arethusa22, arethusa23, arethusa24, arethusa25, arethusa26, arethusa27, arethusa28, arethusa29, arethusa30, arethusa31, arethusa32, arethusa33, arethusa34, arethusa35, arethusa36, arethusa37, arethusa38, arethusa39, arethusa40, arethusa41, arethusa42, arethusa43, arethusa44, arethusa45, arethusa46, arethusa47, arethusa48, arethusa49, arethusa50, arethusa51, arethusa52, arethusa53, arethusa54, arethusa55, arethusa56, arethusa57, arethusa58, arethusa59, arethusa60, arethusa61, arethusa62, arethusa63, arethusa64, arethusa65, arethusa66, arethusa67, arethusa68, arethusa69, arethusa70, arethusa71, arethusa72, arethusa73, arethusa74, arethusa75, arethusa76, arethusa77, arethusa78, arethusa79, arethusa80, arethusa81, arethusa82, arethusa83, arethusa84, arethusa85, arethusa86, arethusa87, arethusa88, arethusa89, arethusa90, arethusa91, arethusa92, arethusa93, arethusa94, arethusa95, arethusa96, arethusa97, arethusa98, arethusa99, arethusa100, arethusa101, arethusa102, arethusa103, arethusa104, arethusa105, arethusa106, arethusa107, arethusa108, arethusa109, arethusa110, arethusa111, arethusa112, arethusa113, arethusa114, arethusa115, arethusa116, arethusa117, arethusa118, arethusa119, arethusa120, arethusa121, arethusa122, arethusa123, arethusa124, arethusa125, arethusa126, arethusa127, arethusa128, arethusa129, arethusa130, arethusa131, arethusa132, arethusa133, arethusa134, arethusa135, arethusa136, arethusa137, arethusa138, arethusa139, arethusa140, arethusa141, arethusa142, arethusa143, arethusa144, arethusa145, arethusa146, arethusa147, arethusa148, arethusa149, arethusa150, arethusa151, arethusa152, arethusa153, arethusa154, arethusa155, arethusa156, arethusa157, arethusa158, arethusa159, arethusa160, arethusa161, arethusa162, arethusa163, arethusa164, arethusa165, arethusa166, arethusa167, arethusa168, arethusa169, arethusa170, arethusa171, arethusa172, arethusa173, arethusa174, arethusa175, arethusa176, arethusa177, arethusa178, arethusa179, arethusa180, arethusa181, arethusa182, arethusa183, arethusa184, arethusa185, arethusa186, arethusa187, arethusa188, arethusa189, arethusa190, arethusa191, arethusa192, arethusa193, arethusa194, arethusa195, arethusa196, arethusa197, arethusa198, arethusa199, arethusa200, arethusa201, arethusa202, arethusa203, arethusa204, arethusa205, arethusa206, arethusa207, arethusa208, arethusa209, arethusa210, arethusa211, arethusa212, arethusa213, arethusa214, arethusa215, arethusa216, arethusa217, arethusa218, arethusa219, arethusa220, arethusa221, arethusa222, arethusa223, arethusa224, arethusa225, arethusa226, arethusa227, arethusa228, arethusa229, arethusa230, arethusa231, arethusa232, arethusa233, arethusa234, arethusa235, arethusa236, arethusa237, arethusa238, arethusa239, arethusa240, arethusa241, arethusa242, arethusa243, arethusa244, arethusa245, arethusa246, arethusa247, arethusa248, arethusa249, arethusa250, arethusa251, arethusa252, arethusa253, arethusa254, arethusa255, arethusa256, arethusa257, arethusa258, arethusa259, arethusa260, arethusa261, arethusa262, arethusa263, arethusa264, arethusa265, arethusa266, arethusa267, arethusa268, arethusa269, arethusa270, arethusa271, arethusa272, arethusa273, arethusa274, arethusa275, arethusa276, arethusa277, arethusa278, arethusa279, arethusa280, arethusa281, arethusa282, arethusa283, arethusa284, arethusa285, arethusa286, arethusa287, arethusa288, arethusa289, arethusa290, arethusa291, arethusa292, arethusa293, arethusa294, arethusa295, arethusa296, arethusa297, arethusa298, arethusa299, arethusa300, arethusa301, arethusa302, arethusa303, arethusa304, arethusa305, arethusa306, arethusa307, arethusa308, arethusa309, arethusa310, arethusa311, arethusa312, arethusa313, arethusa314, arethusa315, arethusa316, arethusa317, arethusa318, arethusa319, arethusa320, arethusa321, arethusa322, arethusa323, arethusa324, arethusa325, arethusa326, arethusa327, arethusa328, arethusa329, arethusa330, arethusa331, arethusa332, arethusa333, arethusa334, arethusa335, arethusa336, arethusa337, arethusa338, arethusa339, arethusa340, arethusa341, arethusa342, arethusa343, arethusa344, arethusa345, arethusa346, arethusa347, arethusa348, arethusa349, arethusa350, arethusa351, arethusa352, arethusa353, arethusa354, arethusa355, arethusa356, arethusa357, arethusa358, arethusa359, arethusa360, arethusa361, arethusa362, arethusa363, arethusa364, arethusa365, arethusa366, arethusa367, arethusa368, arethusa369, arethusa370, arethusa371, arethusa372, arethusa373, arethusa374, arethusa375, arethusa376, arethusa377, arethusa378, arethusa379, arethusa380, arethusa381, arethusa382, arethusa383, arethusa384, arethusa385, arethusa386, arethusa387, arethusa388, arethusa389, arethusa390, arethusa391, arethusa392, arethusa393, arethusa394, arethusa395, arethusa396, arethusa397, arethusa398, arethusa399, arethusa400, arethusa401, arethusa402, arethusa403, arethusa404, arethusa405, arethusa406, arethusa407, arethusa408, arethusa409, arethusa410, arethusa411, arethusa412, arethusa413, arethusa414, arethusa415, arethusa416, arethusa417, arethusa418, arethusa419, arethusa420, arethusa421, arethusa422, arethusa423, arethusa424, arethusa425, arethusa426, arethusa427, arethusa428, arethusa429, arethusa430, arethusa431, arethusa432, arethusa433, arethusa434, arethusa435, arethusa436, arethusa437, arethusa438, arethusa439, arethusa440, arethusa441, arethusa442, arethusa443, arethusa444, arethusa445, arethusa446, arethusa447, arethusa448, arethusa449, arethusa450, arethusa451, arethusa452, arethusa453, arethusa454, arethusa455, arethusa456, arethusa457, arethusa458, arethusa459, arethusa460, arethusa461, arethusa462, arethusa463, arethusa464, arethusa465, arethusa466, arethusa467, arethusa468, arethusa469, arethusa470, arethusa471, arethusa472, arethusa473, arethusa474, arethusa475, arethusa476, arethusa477, arethusa478, arethusa479, arethusa480, arethusa481, arethusa482, arethusa483, arethusa484, arethusa485, arethusa486, arethusa487, arethusa488, arethusa489, arethusa490, arethusa491, arethusa492, arethusa493, arethusa494, arethusa495, arethusa496, arethusa497, arethusa498, arethusa499, arethusa500, arethusa501, arethusa502, arethusa503, arethusa504, arethusa505, arethusa506, arethusa507, arethusa508, arethusa509, arethusa510, arethusa511, arethusa512, arethusa513, arethusa514, arethusa515, arethusa516, arethusa517, arethusa518, arethusa519, arethusa520, arethusa521, arethusa522, arethusa523, arethusa524, arethusa525, arethusa526, arethusa527, arethusa528, arethusa529, arethusa530, arethusa531, arethusa532, arethusa533, arethusa534, arethusa535, arethusa536, arethusa537, arethusa538, arethusa539, arethusa540, arethusa541, arethusa542, arethusa543, arethusa544, arethusa545, arethusa546, arethusa547, arethusa548, arethusa549, arethusa550, arethusa551, arethusa552, arethusa553, arethusa554, arethusa555, arethusa556, arethusa557, arethusa558, arethusa559, arethusa560, arethusa561, arethusa562, arethusa563, arethusa564, arethusa565, arethusa566, arethusa567, arethusa568, arethusa569, arethusa570, arethusa571, arethusa572, arethusa573, arethusa574, arethusa575, arethusa576, arethusa577, arethusa578, arethusa579, arethusa580, arethusa581, arethusa582, arethusa583, arethusa584, arethusa585, arethusa586, arethusa587, arethusa588, arethusa589, arethusa590, arethusa591, arethusa592, arethusa593, arethusa594, arethusa595, arethusa596, arethusa597, arethusa598, arethusa599, arethusa600, arethusa601, arethusa602, arethusa603, arethusa604, arethusa605, arethusa606, arethusa607, arethusa608, arethusa609, arethusa610, arethusa611, arethusa612, arethusa613, arethusa614, arethusa615, arethusa616, arethusa617, arethusa618, arethusa619, arethusa620, arethusa621, arethusa622, arethusa623, arethusa624, arethusa625, arethusa626, arethusa627, arethusa628, arethusa629, arethusa630, arethusa631, arethusa632, arethusa633, arethusa634, arethusa635, arethusa636, arethusa637, arethusa638, arethusa639, arethusa640, arethusa641, arethusa642, arethusa643, arethusa644, arethusa645, arethusa646, arethusa647, arethusa648, arethusa649, arethusa650, arethusa651, arethusa652, arethusa653, arethusa654, arethusa655, arethusa656, arethusa657, arethusa658, arethusa659, arethusa660, arethusa661, arethusa662, arethusa663, arethusa664, arethusa665, arethusa666, arethusa667, arethusa668, arethusa669, arethusa670, arethusa671, arethusa672, arethusa673, arethusa674, arethusa675, arethusa676, arethusa677, arethusa678, arethusa679, arethusa680, arethusa681, arethusa682, arethusa683, arethusa684, arethusa685, arethusa686, arethusa687, arethusa688, arethusa689, arethusa690, arethusa691, arethusa692, arethusa693, arethusa694, arethusa695, arethusa696, arethusa697, arethusa698, arethusa699, arethusa700, arethusa701, arethusa702, arethusa703, arethusa704, arethusa705, arethusa706, arethusa707, arethusa708, arethusa709, arethusa710, arethusa711, arethusa712, arethusa713, arethusa714, arethusa715, arethusa716, arethusa717, arethusa718, arethusa719, arethusa720, arethusa721, arethusa722, arethusa723, arethusa724, arethusa725, arethusa726, arethusa727, arethusa728, arethusa729, arethusa730," +Time setting: 1950s" 'Well, that's all I want to say. I don't have to go on with this bloody nonsense. There are other things to do in the world, you know.' 'You mean philosophy?' said Socrates, and laughed at his joke. 'No,' replied his companion shortly, 'I meant managing a house, an army or an office. Philosophy is just a game for idle men who haven't enough sense to amuse themselves in any better way. There's no good in it: it doesn't help you to get what you want.' 'Yes, but perhaps it helps you not to want what you can't get?' 'That's just a lot of humbug. You don't need philosophy to teach you that. If you're rich and comfortable you won't want anything else, so you won't mind being left alone with your wealth; and if you're miserable you'll be willing to do anything that promises to ease your sufferings. But when you're reasonably well off and comfortable philosophy becomes a bore. It starts putting questions into your head which you can't answer, and leads you to wonder whether there is any good in doing anything at all. Then you begin to wish you had never heard of Plato and Aristotle and all those other fools who wasted their time writing tragedies and playing at philosophy. Their books were all right as long as they remained works of art: I enjoyed them because they were beautiful. But when people try to live by them and take them seriously they become horrible. They kill their children and one another.' 'Perhaps you mean only the doctors who believe in treating unhealthy and intemperate patients?' said the interlocutor. 'Oh no, I'm talking about the patients as well as the doctors. They're both equally mad.' 'But you yourself treat cases of asthma.' 'Yes, I do; but I don't believe in it. I think it's a damned nuisance and I tell my patients so. And I tell them that if they take any exercise they'll soon be rid of it. In fact I tell them everything except how to keep out of my surgery.' The conversation had now turned from philosophy to medicine, and Socrates was making every effort to bring it back again. He kept glancing towards the door, wondering whether he could safely escape without appearing rude. He was afraid of giving offence to his host who seemed, judging from what he had said, to be a man of strong passions. Fortunately his friend did not repeat his criticism of philosophy. Perhaps he guessed that Socrates was longing to escape and refrained from provoking him into a further display of irony. After half an hour of lively conversation Socrates rose to go. He had got to catch the last train at Melton Constable. 'Well, good-bye,' said his host, shaking hands with him warmly. 'Come and see me again some day.' Socrates thanked him for the invitation and promised that he would certainly do so. 46 46 "That is very true, he said. But with the judge it is otherwise; since he governs mind by mind;he ought not therefore to have been trained among vicious minds, andto have associated with them from youth upwards, and to have gonethrough the whole calendar of crime, only in order that he may quicklyinfer the crimes of others as he might their bodily diseases fromhis own self-consciousness; the honourable mind which is to form ahealthy judgment should have had no experience or contamination ofevil habits when young. And this is the reason why in youth good menoften appear to be simple, and are easily practised upon by the dishonest,because they have no examples of what evil is in their own souls. Yes, he said, they are far too apt to be deceived. Therefore, I said, the judge should not be young; he should have learnedto know evil, not from his own soul, but from late and long observationof the nature of evil in others: knowledge should be his guide, notpersonal experience. Yes, he said, that is the ideal of a judge. Yes, I replied, and he will be a good man (which is my answer to yourquestion); for he is good who has a good soul. But the cunning andsuspicious nature of which we spoke, --he who has committed many crimes,and fancies himself to be a master in wickedness, when he is amongsthis fellows, is wonderful in the precautions which he takes, becausehe judges of them by himself: but when he gets into the company ofmen of virtue, who have the experience of age, he appears to be afool again, owing to his unseasonable suspicions; he cannot recognisean honest man, because he has no pattern of honesty in himself; atthe same time, as the bad are more numerous than the good, and hemeets with them oftener, he thinks himself, and is by others thoughtto be, rather wise than foolish. @@ -1147,13 +1147,13 @@ Yet surely, I said, this ferocity only comes from spirit, which, ifrightly educa That I quite think. On the other hand the philosopher will have the quality of gentleness.And this also, when too much indulged, will turn to softness, but,if educated rightly, will be gentle and moderate. True. And in our opinion the guardians ought to have both these qualities? Assuredly. And both should be in harmony? Beyond question. And the harmonious soul is both temperate and courageous?" "Summary: The text discusses the characteristics of a good judge and how they differ from a cunning and suspicious nature. -Enunciation: Dialogue between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Classical philosophy -Active character: Judge, interlocutor" Wie ein Richter, der gut sein soll, nicht an die Wahrheit glaubt, weil er's frchtet, wenn sie zu Tage kommt; sondern den Schelm hlt und ihn mssen lassen tun, bis er selbst entdeckt, was der Schelm im Schilde fhrt. Nichts ist unehrlicher als ein solcher Richter, der gegen alle Laster sich hart macht, um die Dummheiten zu belohnen, welche die Weisheit verletzen, und, da man es ihm nicht heimzahlen knne, sich zu bilden pflegt, da man einen Narren sei, der das Glck gehabt, nicht erfahren zu werden. Und auch ein Narr, der einen so feinen Kopf hat, kann frchten, da er mit einem so weisen Menschen zusammenleben soll. Ich will euch sagen, wie ich mich vor der Spionage bewahre. Wenn einer mir was erzhlt, so lese ich das Gesicht, ob er die Wahrheit spricht oder lgt. Das ist eine Kunst, die ich von den alten Knigen gelernt habe, die viel besser waren als wir. Die haben gesagt: wer vor sich selber nicht ehrlich ist, dem ist kein Vertrauen zu schenken. Man mu schon eine Zeitlang bei ihnen bleiben, um zu merken, wie sie sich benehmen, wenn sie warten, da andre Leute kommen. Dann sieht man, wie sie ihre Augen zusammenkneifen und ein wenig die Stirn runzeln, um ihr Gedchtnis anzuspornen; dann fhren sie sich auf eine besondere Art, und wenn sie noch lange dabei sind, so sprechen sie sich selbst zu, und merkt der, der nahe genug steht, bald einen Mund ohne ein Wort, bald ein Wort ohne Mund. Das war der eigentliche Hinweis, wo jemand lge, und sie htten das Recht gehabt, ihn mit Gewalt niederzuschlagen, und wollten es doch lieber durch List versuchen. Ein groer Mann, den ich kannte, setzte sich vor die Thre, und wenn einer kam, der etwas im Sinne hatte, so fhrte er ihn auf die Seite, und fragte ihn nach seinem Namen und Geschft, und berlegte einen Augenblick, ob er ihn kannte, und hielt seinen Kopf schief und betrachtete ihn scharf. Wenn er nun sagte, er kenne ihn nicht, so verbeugte er sich und stand auf und ging fort. Wenn er aber behauptete, ihn zu kennen, so fragte er weiter, und warf ihm das ausserdem vor, da er sich verndere, und lat es sich wohl sein, da er seinen alten Anzug behielte, denn es werde noch besser werden. Was denken Sie, wie lang der Kerl stand und schwatzte? Bis er zuletzt alles herausplapperte, was in seiner Brust herumging. Das war ein groes Geschft, das wir damals machten. Aber meine Schwester war schn, und mein Freund hat sie liebgewonnen, und so ging es von Tag zu Tag, bis wir uns alle drei der Hhle nahmen und die Pforte verschlo. Wir dachten, niemand werde uns finden, aber andere haben uns gefunden, und so sind wir hier. Nun, wie stehen Sie dazu? Soll ich Ihnen noch was anderes erzhlen? Oder wollen Sie sich ein wenig hinlegen? Das wird Ihnen gefallen; da ist eine gute Kissen. +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: Judge, interlocutor" "Wie ein guter Richter herausfinden mu, ob der Schauspieler den Part des Zauberknners glcklich darstellt oder nicht. Ein solcher Mann ist kein Verwalter fr mich. Er ist ein Mann wie ich: stark und gndig. Der Stiefelknopf wird er mir wieder an die rechte Stelle setzen. Und jetzt komm! Ich habe keine Lust mehr, so in der Hhle zu hocken."""" 3. Kapitel Jeder leidliche Mensch hat das Gefhl, da ihn die Natur von allen andern Menschen unterscheidet; aber es gibt nur wenige, denen diese Vorzge auch noch achtbar sind. Es gibt viele, die sich ber ihren Geschmack lustig machen und andere im Geschft leiten lassen, die ihnen diesen Vorzug absprechen. So ist es mit dem Misstrauen. Manche Leute sind ganz auf diesen Vorzug stolz und wollen nichts tun, wenn sie nicht davon berzeugt sind, da es richtig sei; sie sind unglaublich vorsichtig und vertrauen niemandem etwas an. Solche Leute haben eine schne Eigenschaft, denn sie sind oft die besten Freunde, weil sie nie jemanden belgen oder betrugen mchten. Allein sie sind auch oft recht widerwrtig, weil sie niemandem traut, weder gute noch bse Absichten zu, und also zum besten oder zum schlechtesten gehn. Das merkt man ihnen wohl ans Gesicht an, besonders wenn sie bei ihrer Arbeit sind. Ein solcher vertrauensloser Kopf sieht aus, als ob er schon immer darauf wartete, einen Betrger oder Lgner zu treffen. Die Welt hat diese Art Leute """"Knochen"""" genannt und gefreut sich ber ihre Spitzfindigkeit. Aber wer Knochen ist, der ist Knochen, und wer sonst ist, der ist doch nicht Knochen. Nun, ich bin aber nicht Knochen. Ich vertraue meinen eigenen Gedanken viel eher, als jemand anderen, was mir bequem ist, und wenn jemand nicht gerade so arbeitet, wie ich es gerne sehe, so frage ich ihn, warum er's nicht besser macht. Wer gegen mich sein Bestes tut, der kann mir vertrauen, und ich werde ihm vertrauen. Ich kenne meine Geschftigkeit und will keinerlei Kunststcke vorstellen, denn das ist ein Zeichen schwachen Verstandes. Wenn ich irgendeine Sache nicht verstehe, so sage ich's offen, und wenn ich sie verstehe, so tue ich sie, so gut ich kann, und wenn ich sie falsch mache, so sage ich auch gleich, da ich sie falsch mache. Alle Leute, die so sind, sind jederzeit gesetzt und beliebt, denn sie geben keinen Anla zu Missverstndnis und finden sich immer wieder mit allen Leuten gut, weil sie immer gelassen bleiben. Die Leute, die es anders machen, mssen eben nach und nach den Verdacht abbauen, wenn sie einmal verdchtig geworden sind. Und das sind nun die Leute, die ich nicht mag und die ich vor allen Leuten hasse, die in meiner Nhe sind. Denn diese nehmen mich um mein Geld und nehmen alles weg, was ich besitze. Diese sind mir eine Last und eine Brgung. Ich meine die Schelmereien, die sich hinter kleinen Vertraulichkeiten verbergen, die Heimlichkeit und Unaufrichtigkeit. " 47 47 "Yes. And the inharmonious is cowardly and boorish? Very true. And, when a man allows music to play upon him and to pour into hissoul through the funnel of his ears those sweet and soft and melancholyairs of which we were just now speaking, and his whole life is passedin warbling and the delights of song; in the first stage of the processthe passion or spirit which is in him is tempered like iron, and madeuseful, instead of brittle and useless. But, if he carries on thesoftening and soothing process, in the next stage he begins to meltand waste, until he has wasted away his spirit and cut out the sinewsof his soul; and he becomes a feeble warrior. Very true. If the element of spirit is naturally weak in him the change is speedilyaccomplished, but if he have a good deal, then the power of musicweakening the spirit renders him excitable; --on the least provocationhe flames up at once, and is speedily extinguished; instead of havingspirit he grows irritable and passionate and is quite impracticable. Exactly. And so in gymnastics, if a man takes violent exercise and is a greatfeeder, and the reverse of a great student of music and philosophy,at first the high condition of his body fills him with pride and spirit,and lie becomes twice the man that he was. @@ -1170,13 +1170,13 @@ Yes. And as we are to have the best of guardians for our city, must theynot be t Yes. And to this end they ought to be wise and efficient, and to have aspecial care of the State? True. And a man will be most likely to care about that which he loves? To be sure. And he will be most likely to love that which he regards as havingthe same interests with himself, and that of which the good or evilfortune is supposed by him at any time most to affect his own?" "Summary: The text discusses the effects of music and philosophy on the human soul and their role in governing a city-state. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Active character: Socrates, other speaker(s" You have to ask the question of music, not of its forms, but of music itself, what it is and what it does in the soul. You must also ask the same questions about philosophy. I am not going to undertake the task now, nor is it my business to do so, for you would never have a city governed by law if I were to make you discuss these subjects before you had learned them thoroughly. But when you have learnt them thoroughly and are able to defend your own views, then, if you want, we will return to this point again and inquire into the nature of each of them; for the present, as I said, let us assume that they are both good and beneficial. 10 Well then, my friend, he said, if they are both good and beneficial, let us also assume that they govern together and are friends with one another and with the rulers. And when we speak of the rulers governing the rest of the city, do we mean that the many shall rule or that the few? We mean that the one who has knowledge of the truth and the power to carry it out should rule. But surely, he said, the one who knows how to calculate the moon and the seasons could not possibly be one of the many. No indeed, but he must be one of the few who are always the same and never change; for the changing many cannot know anything that is always the same. +Active character: Socrates, other speaker(s" "You know that the soul is a harmony, and that there is no other way of which we have knowledge whereby the elements can be bound together except by harmony? You also admit that the influence of music is a divine gift? Then surely you must admit that philosophy or music is the only thing which can govern a state. They are the only things which can bind together the iron and brass and the other metals which make up a state. And surely there is nothing which cannot be governed by philosophy and music except the creatures who live in the sea, and perhaps a few of the wild beasts. But you will find, if you reflect, that even most of these are tamed by music; for look at birds, how easily they are caught when you play on the flute. Now I think that we may fairly say that music and philosophy will suffice for the government of cities and men. 10 So Socrates tells us, but he is not always right in everything that he says."" A harsh laugh greeted this remark from several of the company. But one of them said to the speaker: """"I am afraid that you are going to get into trouble."""" No,"" replied the other, ""I am not afraid of Socrates, because I do not believe anything that he says."""" He's right,"" said another, ""for he has never yet told the truth about anything."" " 48 48 "Very true, he replied. Then there must be a selection. Let us note among the guardians thosewho in their whole life show the greatest eagerness to do what isfor the good of their country, and the greatest repugnance to do whatis against her interests. Those are the right men. And they will have to be watched at every age, in order that we maysee whether they preserve their resolution, and never, under the influenceeither of force or enchantment, forget or cast off their sense ofduty to the State. How cast off? he said. I will explain to you, I replied. A resolution may go out of a man'smind either with his will or against his will; with his will whenhe gets rid of a falsehood and learns better, against his will wheneverhe is deprived of a truth. @@ -1193,15 +1193,15 @@ Yes. And there should also be toils and pains and conflicts prescribedfor them, Very right, he replied. And then, I said, we must try them with enchantments that is the thirdsort of test --and see what will be their behaviour: like those whotake colts amid noise and tumult to see if they are of a timid nature,so must we take our youth amid terrors of some kind, and again passthem into pleasures, and prove them more thoroughly than gold is provedin the furnace, that we may discover whether they are armed againstall enchantments, and of a noble bearing always, good guardians ofthemselves and of the music which they have learned, and retainingunder all circumstances a rhythmical and harmonious nature, such aswill be most serviceable to the individual and to the State. And hewho at every age, as boy and youth and in mature life, has come outof the trial victorious and pure, shall be appointed a ruler and guardianof the State; he shall be honoured in life and death, and shall receivesepulture and other memorials of honour, the greatest that we haveto give. But him who fails, we must reject. I am inclined to thinkthat this is the sort of way in which our rulers and guardians shouldbe chosen and appointed. I speak generally, and not with any pretensionto exactness." "Summary: The text discusses the selection and training of guardians for a state, emphasizing the importance of virtue and moral character. Trope: Moral education, ideal society Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialogue between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical argument -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, interlocutor -Time setting: Contemporary" Then you must select the best men as your guardians. They must be those who have proved themselves most able to resist pleasure and pain, and who in all their conduct are least swayed by these feelings, that they may be least likely to become the slaves of their own creations, and so be made unjust and impious.” “Very true,” said I; “but how are they to be selected?” “They must be selected according to those qualities which are believed to make for virtue, whether in states or individuals.” “But is there any virtue which is not based on wisdom, temperance, courage, justice?” “Certainly not.” “And yet is wisdom alone a sufficient safeguard of virtue?” “Wisdom without temperance is surely madness.” “And temperance without wisdom is surely extravagance.” “Yes, but you will not deny that temperance also has an element of wisdom.” “No, indeed.” “Then, if we are right in asserting that knowledge is better than ignorance, we shall say that temperance is a form of wisdom.” “Yes, far better.” “And we were also saying that the same principle ought to be applied to individual and to state.” “Yes, that was said.” “Then, if the individual is to be virtuous, he must be temperate?” “He must.” “And the state also, if it is to be virtuous, must be temperate?” “That is clear.” “Then don’t you think that the greater the degree of temperance which prevails in a state, the greater will be its virtue?” “Certainly.” “Now we are agreed that temperance is wisdom with regard to pleasures and pains, and that the temperate man is he who knows the difference between them; he will choose none of the inferior pleasures, nor abstain from any of the superior ones?” “I dare say.” “And this is the reason why the intemperate man does not know what is good for him, because he cannot distinguish the nature of pleasure or pain; he confounds them and calls bad things good, and good things bad, and thus he ever lives a life of misery through his own fault, and dares to accuse the gods.” “You speak truly.” “Then we were right in saying that temperance is a form of wisdom, and the temperate man is wise?” “We must say so.” “And did we not also affirm that justice was wisdom about the business of another?” “True.” “And when the same person is just and temperate, we call him good?” “Yes.” “But when another is just, and the other temperate, we do not call either of them good, but only one of them just and the other temperate?” “True.” “Then we conclude that justice and temperance are different virtues?” “Clearly.” “Yet we said that virtue was wisdom, and not merely wisdom but a certain kind of wisdom?” “True.” “Is wisdom about the business of another a part of wisdom about the business of oneself?” +Time setting: 1950s" "Then he said: 'And now, you young fellow, tell us how a State is rightly constituted. Is it by the selection of the men who are naturally fitted to rule, or by the power of friends and relatives, or by lot, or by some other method? ' I answered that it was not until the State had been constituted that these things were discussed; but that before any of them could be determined, there must be a State in existence. 'Excellent,' he said. And yet, my dear Glaucon, even the State exists first, and afterwards the individual; the whole is prior to the part.' 'By Zeus, he said, and so I believe, though in fact we are speaking after their manner.' 'You mean,' I said, 'that before the parts can have any life of themselves they must have a living creature to which they belong; this is true.' 'Certainly,' he replied; 'but what life will they receive from the body when this is imperfectly organized?' 'Why, do you think that sight or hearing would be as good in a defective body?' said I. 'Impossible,' said he. 'Well, then,' I said, 'in like manner, I said, if the State is imperfect, and has not the care of the weakest sort of natures, all the powers of the best sort of natures, however great, will be impaired.' 'Why so?' 'Why, because they will fall under the influence of vicious governments, of demagogues, claps in irons, and death, and will pass a life full of danger and harmness for want of that nature which is the natural safeguard of man, namely justice. 'But let us not be over-nice,' I said; 'for perhaps people will say that such a situation is impossible.' 'What then would be the way in which the State may be imperfect? Would not the want of some element or other in the soul of the individual be generally the cause?' 'Yes.' 'Well, let us see whether this be true.' 'Say, Socrates,' he replied, 'do you know what I am going to ask, although it is not easy to make clear? ' What you are about to ask,"" I said, ""will be clearly enough understood if I answer your questions with the assistance of the God of Love; and therefore I must pray Him to be gracious unto me.' 'He will, no doubt, be gracious,' said Polemarchus, 'if you ask judiciously.' 'And thus I proceed,' I said; 'assuming, as it were, that we were painting a face, and that we began by drawing the eyebrows, now, instead of black and red, we will suppose that we used white and purple, and that we made the eyes blue instead of the black brown which Nature ordains; and let us further suppose that we made the nostrils somewhat curved instead of straight; and in order that coppery hair may appear, we will set a golden crown upon the head; " 49 49 "And, speaking generally, I agree with you, he said. And perhaps the word 'guardian' in the fullest sense ought to be appliedto this higher class only who preserve us against foreign enemiesand maintain peace among our citizens at home, that the one may nothave the will, or the others the power, to harm us. The young menwhom we before called guardians may be more properly designated auxiliariesand supporters of the principles of the rulers. I agree with you, he said. How then may we devise one of those needful falsehoods of which welately spoke --just one royal lie which may deceive the rulers, ifthat be possible, and at any rate the rest of the city? What sort of lie? he said. Nothing new, I replied; only an old Phoenician tale of what has oftenoccurred before now in other places, (as the poets say, and have madethe world believe,) though not in our time, and I do not know whethersuch an event could ever happen again, or could now even be made probable,if it did. @@ -1212,15 +1212,15 @@ True, I replied, but there is more coming; I have only told you half.Citizens, w Not in the present generation, he replied; there is no way of accomplishingthis; but their sons may be made to believe in the tale, and theirsons' sons, and posterity after them. I see the difficulty, I replied; yet the fostering of such a beliefwill make them care more for the city and for one another. Enough,however, of the fiction, which may now fly abroad upon the wings ofrumour, while we arm our earth-born heroes, and lead them forth underthe command of their rulers. Let them look round and select a spotwhence they can best suppress insurrection, if any prove refractorywithin, and also defend themselves against enemies, who like wolvesmay come down on the fold from without; there let them encamp, andwhen they have encamped, let them sacrifice to the proper Gods andprepare their dwellings." "Summary: The speaker proposes a lie to the rulers in order to maintain peace and unity in the city. Narrative arc: Exposition -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Speech -Literary movement: Plato's Republic +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The speaker, the person being addressed -Time setting: Contemporary" "I want you to take me as I am, raw and hardboiled. You asked for a lie; well, here it is. The way that I see it, the whole thing can be fixed up by telling a whopper. It's like this: In the good old days when the rulers were gods they used to have a lot of fun in Olympus, but then Zeus got married and the other gods started getting hitched too, and everything went sour because they began having kids. And the more kids they had the worse things got, till finally Zeus was afraid his palace would be overrun by brats if he didn't do something about it. So he called all the other gods together and told them that they'd have to control their wives and keep them from having any more babies or else he'd throw them out of Olympus and make them live with us poor mortals."""" That's what you call a whopper,"" said the voice that belonged to the head on the floor. Yes, sir, and it worked fine. All the gods knew how Zeus felt about babies, so no more were born. Only one little girl was ever brought into the world after that, and she was Hestia, who stayed home and looked after the fire on the hearth while the other gods were playing around."""" Well?"" What?"" Well, what happened next?"""" Oh, nothing much. But now we come to the main point. We're just plain folks these days and there's only one God. He's not exactly a Greek god, nor even an Olympian, but he's still a man, and it seems to me that if he finds out we've been busy making more citizens for our city he'll get sore and start playing hob with our government. And that would be bad. So my advice to you gentlemen is to let the families go right on increasing and not worry about it. That's the truth about why I'm opposed to the new law, and if you think it over you'll probably agree with me. The only trouble is that it's not quite true. But it's better than the truth, and since we've got to tell a lie anyway we might as well tell the best one we can."""" By God!"" said the head on the floor. ""That's the kind of talk that suits me! Now if we could only find some way to shut the mouth of that crackpot Socrates."""" That's easy enough,"" I said. ""We'll tell him that if he opens his big trap again we'll cut his tongue out and feed it to the dogs. Come on, boys, let's go down to the jail and give him a piece of our minds."""" I don't know whether you realize it or not,"" said my father, ""but you people are a pretty crooked bunch. If you carry out your plans you'll break up the peace of this city and cause a lot of hard feelings among its citizens. " +Time setting: 1950s" I had a feeling that if I went on talking, I might be able to persuade him to try and maintain the appearance of peace in the city until I had found out what it was all about. I could see he didn't like it. He muttered something under his breath about me being a liar and a villain for asking him to cover up murder when I knew he was guilty as hell himself. But he swallowed it. He's weak enough, but not quite such a fool as all that. So I told him what I wanted him to do. I said: 'Look here, you rotten little bastard. If you pull this off right you'll be worth ten thousand dollars to me, but if you foul things up by letting your mouth run away with you you can take it from me that I'll kill you like a rat. So keep your trap shut and listen.' Then I gave him the kind of kick that would have landed him on his backside if he hadn't been sitting down already. 'You're going to tell these guys that you were in your office till after midnight last night. You're going to say you never left your office except for a few minutes at six o'clock to pick up some cigarettes at the drugstore round the corner. You won't mention anything about the girl. You won't say she was ever in your office at all. And you won't say you were up in my place either. You understand?' He nodded. 'Good,' I said. 'Now you can thank God I'm a reasonable man. Otherwise you wouldn't be around to enjoy your new-found wealth. Now get moving.' I pushed him towards the door. He didn't turn round. He just said, 'Get off my back' in a nasty, spiteful voice. I kicked him again and he got up and walked over to the door. As he opened it, he turned and looked at me. His face was white and sweaty. The tip of his nose was red. There were spots of blood on his shirt front. 'You won't get away with it,' he said. 'It's only a matter of time.' Then he slammed the door and went downstairs. It took me five minutes to calm myself down before I phoned the number the Commissioner gave me. 50 50 "Just so, he said. And their dwellings must be such as will shield them against the coldof winter and the heat of summer. I suppose that you mean houses, he replied. Yes, I said; but they must be the houses of soldiers, and not of shop-keepers. What is the difference? he said. That I will endeavour to explain, I replied. To keep watchdogs, who,from want of discipline or hunger, or some evil habit, or evil habitor other, would turn upon the sheep and worry them, and behave notlike dogs but wolves, would be a foul and monstrous thing in a shepherd? @@ -1234,16 +1234,16 @@ Yes, said Glaucon. BOOK IV Adeimantus - SOCRATES Here Adeimantus interposed a question: How would you answer, Socrates,said he, if a person were to say that you are making these peoplemiserable, and that they are the cause of their own unhappiness; thecity in fact belongs to them, but they are none the better for it;whereas other men acquire lands, and build large and handsome houses,and have everything handsome about them, offering sacrifices to thegods on their own account, and practising hospitality; moreover, asyou were saying just now, they have gold and silver, and all thatis usual among the favourites of fortune; but our poor citizens areno better than mercenaries who are quartered in the city and are alwaysmounting guard?" "Summary: The speaker discusses the importance of education and the way of life for guardians in a state. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonism +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, Glaucon -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" I have only to add that, if you take away from a man his superior man's education, the result will be that when he meets with an inferior who is his equal in ignorance, he will not know himself, but he will fancy that the other is superior; and he will praise him and set him up, and be his slave in spite of himself; and if any one takes away from such a one, whether woman or man, his or her inferiority, then you will find out what follows. The best of either sex should be educated, and left free to marry or not; and when they do marry, there is an end of the matter; for nature must be absolutely sovereign, and the best of each should rule. I am inclined to think that all these are of little importance compared with wisdom and virtue in general. But let us say no more about education, lest we may seem to be eating up too much of your time; which is, as you remember, a far shorter substance than we could desire. Glaucon Here, my dear friend, I began, interrupting him, you are really wondrous, and, as I always say, in a realm of your own. I observe that you are carefully excluding those values of knowledge and art which money can buy, and instead of them are ranged upon the hips of your scheme those higher ideals which cannot be purchased by any amount of wealth. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "I guess he thinks it's funny to kid a man who was educated in a reform school. I don't like his looks, and I'm going to get rid of him."""" Glaucon watched me narrowly as I spoke. He had never seen my temper rise, and he had the impression that I was just using it as a shield to cover my embarrassment at my failure with the charmer. It was partly true. I had felt some annoyance when Socrates turned on me so suddenly, but the moment I saw his eyes harden behind their veil of humor I knew that I was dealing with an adversary whom I could neither outwit nor bully. So I resorted to bluff. When you have finished your work here,"" I said, ""I want you to come with me to the prison. There is a murderer in there, and I am going to have a talk with him."" That should give him something to think about. In any case, I wanted to get out of the room before Socrates began to question him. And I did not want to leave Glaucon alone with him for fear that the poet might find himself the subject of another lecture. As we were leaving the house I caught up with Socrates and walked beside him. How long will you be in Athens?"" he asked. A few days. I have business at Corinth."""" You are a busy man, aren't you?"" I shrugged my shoulders. """"Not really. Most of what I do is for others."""" Is it?"""" It seems so. I spend much of my time on other people's affairs."" Do you find that profitable?"" Sometimes."" But not always, eh? Well, that's a pity. We all need money. What does one do with it if one has too much?"""" I didn't know. Buy more. Or lose it."" And then there is nothing left, eh? Not even honor or glory. I wonder what Plato would say about that. He is very fond of honor, and glory he worships."""" I nodded. Yes, I know. Perhaps Plato should look after his own business rather than worry about mine. By the way, how are your plans for the trip coming along?"""" Oh, I shall be ready whenever you are."" Tell me, though: Who was that chap you were talking to?"" The poet Xenophanes. He was born in Colophon, but he lives here now. He writes tragedies and epics, mostly about gods."""" I can imagine. I've seen some of his plays."" Have you?"" I nodded. ""Yes, they're marvelous. Full of action and excitement and passion."""" Socrates looked at me curiously. """"So you are interested in poetry?"""" I paused. """"No, not especially. But I had to read Xenophanes' works for a course in philosophy."""" Do you like philosophy?"" I shrugged my shoulders. """"Who knows? If it weren't for Plato I'd probably hate it. " 51 51 "Yes, I said; and you may add that they are only fed, and not paidin addition to their food, like other men; and therefore they cannot,if they would, take a journey of pleasure; they have no money to spendon a mistress or any other luxurious fancy, which, as the world goes,is thought to be happiness; and many other accusations of the samenature might be added. But, said he, let us suppose all this to be included in the charge. You mean to ask, I said, what will be our answer? Yes. If we proceed along the old path, my belief, I said, is that we shallfind the answer. And our answer will be that, even as they are, ourguardians may very likely be the happiest of men; but that our aimin founding the State was not the disproportionate happiness of anyone class, but the greatest happiness of the whole; we thought thatin a State which is ordered with a view to the good of the whole weshould be most likely to find Justice, and in the ill-ordered Stateinjustice: and, having found them, we might then decide which of thetwo is the happier. At present, I take it, we are fashioning the happyState, not piecemeal, or with a view of making a few happy citizens,but as a whole; and by-and-by we will proceed to view the oppositekind of State. Suppose that we were painting a statue, and some onecame up to us and said, Why do you not put the most beautiful colourson the most beautiful parts of the body --the eyes ought to be purple,but you have made them black --to him we might fairly answer, Sir,you would not surely have us beautify the eyes to such a degree thatthey are no longer eyes; consider rather whether, by giving this andthe other features their due proportion, we make the whole beautiful.And so I say to you, do not compel us to assign to the guardians asort of happiness which will make them anything but guardians; forwe too can clothe our husbandmen in royal apparel, and set crownsof gold on their heads, and bid them till the ground as much as theylike, and no more. Our potters also might be allowed to repose oncouches, and feast by the fireside, passing round the winecup, whiletheir wheel is conveniently at hand, and working at pottery only asmuch as they like; in this way we might make every class happy-andthen, as you imagine, the whole State would be happy. But do not putthis idea into our heads; for, if we listen to you, the husbandmanwill be no longer a husbandman, the potter will cease to be a potter,and no one will have the character of any distinct class in the State.Now this is not of much consequence where the corruption of society,and pretension to be what you are not, is confined to cobblers; butwhen the guardians of the laws and of the government are only seeminglyand not real guardians, then see how they turn the State upside down;and on the other hand they alone have the power of giving order andhappiness to the State. We mean our guardians to be true savioursand not the destroyers of the State, whereas our opponent is thinkingof peasants at a festival, who are enjoying a life of revelry, notof citizens who are doing their duty to the State. But, if so, wemean different things, and he is speaking of something which is nota State. And therefore we must consider whether in appointing ourguardians we would look to their greatest happiness individually,or whether this principle of happiness does not rather reside in theState as a whole. But the latter be the truth, then the guardiansand auxillaries, and all others equally with them, must be compelledor induced to do their own work in the best way. And thus the wholeState will grow up in a noble order, and the several classes willreceive the proportion of happiness which nature assigns to them. @@ -1251,16 +1251,16 @@ I think that you are quite right. I wonder whether you will agree with another r What may that be? There seem to be two causes of the deterioration of the arts. What are they? Wealth, I said, and poverty. How do they act? The process is as follows: When a potter becomes rich, will he, thinkyou, any longer take the same pains with his art?" "Summary: The speaker discusses the happiness and roles of the guardians in a state, arguing that their happiness should not come at the expense of their duties. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue Active character: The speaker, the person being addressed -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "The other shrugged. """"Well, of course we're happy! We have everything to make us so: the best possible living conditions; a place in life that gives us freedom and responsibility; our work to do; our pleasures; and even the satisfaction of knowing that without us this state would be helpless."""" The speaker nodded vigorously. Then he leaned forward and his voice became very hardboiled indeed. It's about time you realized that your happiness can't come at the expense of your duties. You're supposed to be guardians of the people. But for the past month or two it's been the other way around. Your duty is to see that they stay safe and happy here; but instead you let them get away from you, and you chased after them like a pack of hounds in heat. Well, I don't care whether you feel humiliated or not, but I want to tell you something: you're being no good as guardians if you let yourselves lose sight of your job. If the people are going to be happy, they've got to be watched over and protected; and if you aren't up to it, then somebody else has got to take over your duties!"""" The man who had been sitting on the throne looked startled. The other members of the group exchanged glances, and the one who had first spoken said: You mustn't take this personally, sir. We realize that you've just arrived here and haven't yet had time to understand our situation...."""" No,"" interrupted the other sharply. ""I'm not taking it personally. I'm talking about your behavior. And I'm telling you that you'd better get back to your job and do it right or you'll find yourselves out of it!"""" There was another pause while they digested this. Then one of them spoke again. Sir,"" he said, ""we know that you were brought here by the Lady of Darkness. And we know what she told you about her intentions toward this state. We also know that she has made you her champion and given you certain powers."""" Yes."" Well, now, sir, we know that you don't really want to harm us. After all, you're a gentleman and we know that you wouldn't willingly hurt women or children. And we know that you don't want to destroy this state because you're new here and you don't realize how important it is to its inhabitants."""" What?"" the other exclaimed. ""You mean you actually believe that this is a place of refuge for criminals and undesirables? That those people are the only ones who live here?"""" Of course, sir!"" The man who had spoken before answered promptly. ""Why else would there be so many criminals? Why else would there be such an abundance of food and clothing and housing? Why else would there be so much liberty and comfort?"""" You must be crazy!"" the other shouted. ""This isn't a refuge for scoundrels and villains! These people are the real inhabitants of this state. They're the ones who founded it; they're the ones who built it and made it prosper. " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" The happiness of the guardians, he said, was not to be purchased at the price of their duties. If they were in a state of war, and had the care of preserving the state against its enemies, then they must be prepared to endure hardships, or even death if necessary; and if they shrank from these, they were unfit for their position, however great might be their present enjoyment. The ideal State is an army, and every citizen should be trained as a soldier who will fight with heart and soul. But let us suppose that this is carried out, and that our army has won a victory, and has captured a lot of slaves. Then we shall have men whose spirits are broken by defeat, and who are incapable of work; and here are our guardians, who have been bred as soldiers, and are full of vigour and strength. Shall they be expected to do the work of slaves? Not at all. The victors, having become masters of the conquered city, may take possession of the houses and lands, but they should not impose labour on the prisoners. They must be allowed to live according to their own custom, except that they must give up any luxuries which are forbidden to the conquerors. The same principle should be applied to women; they should have equal education, and the same occupations; but they should not be compelled to marry men whom they dislike, or to be the wives of men whom they do not like. And thus, under the influence of this new philosophy, the old-fashioned notions about the home and family life being kept sacred from politics and the quarrels of states will pass away. “And now,” said I to Glaucon, “what do you say? Do you think that this is a better and more desirable arrangement than the one which we were before describing?” “Yes,” he replied; “but yet I find myself brought back once more to the old fashion of giving the authority over women to their husbands.” “Why?” I asked. “Because I imagine that when each person has his or her own proper business to perform, the result will be better.” “That,” I said, “is natural enough; but why do you assume that men are made by nature to rule, and women to be ruled?” “Certainly, I should say so,” he answered. “Then you ought to have equal power and authority in all cases, if you agree that there is no difference between women and men.” “There is a very great difference even as things are,” he said. “What is that difference?” “Women, in my opinion, are naturally suited to make the best housewives.” “Yes, but surely” said I, “we were admitting only a few moments ago that this gift of theirs is quite superfluous; for what need is there of housework when there is no private property? No doubt they will spend their time in working at their weaving, as anciently, because this sort of work is suitable to their dispositions, and not like the men because they love luxury and not simplicity, and because they are always desiring to add to their ornaments and fine clothes. 52 52 "Certainly not. He will grow more and more indolent and careless? Very true. And the result will be that he becomes a worse potter? Yes; he greatly deteriorates. But, on the other hand, if he has no money, and cannot provide himselftools or instruments, he will not work equally well himself, nor willhe teach his sons or apprentices to work equally well. Certainly not. Then, under the influence either of poverty or of wealth, workmenand their work are equally liable to degenerate? That is evident. Here, then, is a discovery of new evils, I said, against which theguardians will have to watch, or they will creep into the city unobserved. @@ -1277,14 +1277,14 @@ I agree with you, for I think you right. And suppose that, before engaging, our That is not likely; and yet there might be a danger to the poor Stateif the wealth of many States were to be gathered into one. But how simple of you to use the term State at all of any but ourown! Why so? You ought to speak of other States in the plural number; not one ofthem is a city, but many cities, as they say in the game. For indeedany city, however small, is in fact divided into two, one the cityof the poor, the other of the rich; these are at war with one another;and in either there are many smaller divisions, and you would be altogetherbeside the mark if you treated them all as a single State. But ifyou deal with them as many, and give the wealth or power or personsof the one to the others, you will always have a great many friendsand not many enemies. And your State, while the wise order which hasnow been prescribed continues to prevail in her, will be the greatestof States, I do not mean to say in reputation or appearance, but indeed and truth, though she number not more than a thousand defenders.A single State which is her equal you will hardly find, either amongHellenes or barbarians, though many that appear to be as great andmany times greater." "Summary: The text discusses the effects of wealth and poverty on workmanship and the potential advantages of a city with a limited amount of wealthy citizens. -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue Active character: Socrates, Adeimantus -Time setting: Contemporary" "The rich man has more money to buy the tools and materials with, and can spend more time in his work; he will also have more people working for him, so that when the work is done it will be better than what the poor man does. And if he is a sculptor or a painter he will make more beautiful things. The whole population of Athens, except the slaves and the women, are engaged in some kind of handicraft; but as the wealth of the city increases, the work of each individual becomes better and better. In olden times they did not know how to do anything very well, because they were poor; now they have become more skilled in their trades, because they are richer."""" Socrates."" said Adeimantus, ""I understand your meaning perfectly; but I should like to ask you a question: If you had a choice between living in a country which was entirely inhabited by men who had no more than two thousand drachmas a year apiece, and one in which there were a few persons possessing enormous fortunes, would you prefer to live in the first?"""" Certainly not,"" replied Socrates; ""and yet, as I told you just now, the greater the inequality of wealth, the worse the workmanship. " +Time setting: 1950s" "The work of the poor man is not good for much. If he makes a table, it will be rickety; if he makes a basket, it will be clumsy and squeaky. There is no art in his workmanship. The rich man, on the other hand, can make things that are beautiful and last forever."""" Socrates shook his head. """"In my opinion you're wrong there, Adeimantus. The wealthy man's work is inferior to the poor man's. It has been my experience that the poorer a man is the better workman he is. A rich man has time to waste on ornamentation and decoration, and they spoil his work. As long as a man is poor, however, he knows that he must work hard and quickly, or starve. The result is that he does work well, and there is no time for ornamentation."""" Socrates' words were interrupted by a burst of applause from the listeners. You're right,"" someone shouted. ""I remember an old carpenter in our town who made the best tables in the county. He worked in the poorest shack I ever saw, and he wore the shabbiest clothes. But when you looked at one of his tables, you would have thought you were looking at a painting instead of wood."""" Another voice said: """"You can't forget that great old-fashioned cabinet-maker in Boston, who used to furnish all the houses up and down the coast. His workshop was so dirty and cluttered up with tools that you couldn't see anything. And he dressed like a tramp. But look at the furniture he made!"""" A third person added: """"It's just as true in music as it is in woodworking. The greatest musicians I've known have always been poor men. They never had time for fancy clothes or expensive meals or any of those things. All their time was taken up with music, and they knew that their livelihood depended upon their ability to play well. That's why they practiced every day until they could make their instruments talk."""" Adeimantus nodded vigorously. """"Yes,"""" he exclaimed, """"that's exactly what I meant. The poor man has got to work all the time; he has nothing to do but work. And the result is that he becomes an expert in his job. A rich man, on the other hand, has too many other things to occupy his mind. When he works at all, it's only for the money he can get for it; he doesn't care about the quality of his work."""" * * * * * There was another silence after Adeimantus finished speaking, during which the listeners looked at each other doubtfully. Then Socrates smiled. """"I don't know whether you're right or wrong,"""" he said. """"But let us suppose that you are. What would be the advantages of having a city in which there were very few rich people?"""" " 53 53 "That is most true, he said. And what, I said, will be the best limit for our rulers to fix whenthey are considering the size of the State and the amount of territorywhich they are to include, and beyond which they will not go? What limit would you propose? I would allow the State to increase so far as is consistent with unity;that, I think, is the proper limit. Very good, he said. Here then, I said, is another order which will have to be conveyedto our guardians: Let our city be accounted neither large nor small,but one and self-sufficing. @@ -1301,12 +1301,12 @@ Yes, he said; the lawlessness of which you speak too easily stealsin. Yes, I replied, in the form of amusement; and at first sight it appearsharmless. Why, yes, he said, and there is no harm; were it not that little bylittle this spirit of licence, finding a home, imperceptibly penetratesinto manners and customs; whence, issuing with greater force, it invadescontracts between man and man, and from contracts goes on to lawsand constitutions, in utter recklessness, ending at last, Socrates,by an overthrow of all rights, private as well as public. Is that true? I said. That is my belief, he replied. Then, as I was saying, our youth should be trained from the firstin a stricter system, for if amusements become lawless, and the youthsthemselves become lawless, they can never grow up into well-conductedand virtuous citizens." "Summary: The text discusses the importance of education and music in maintaining a well-functioning state. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Active character: Socrates, Adeimantus" Socrates. Was dir der Staat nicht geben kann, das kannst du dir selbst holen; denn sonst wrst du arm und verlassen. Adeimantus. Das ist sehr richtig, Socrates; aber wie soll ich mir ein frhrechnungs- oder eine Geometriebcherei kaufen? Socrates. Dafr mssen wir den Staat verbessern, ehe wir auch nur daran denken knnen, dich zu unterrichten. Denn wenn der Staat nicht in Ordnung ist, so werden weder du noch irgendwer andere etwas Gutes haben knnen. Denn wo sich die Gesetze und die Macht des Staates nicht aufs beste verbinden, da mu auch der Menschen Glck von Grund aus unsicher sein. Ein Staat ohne Musik wird niemals gut sein knnen, weder jetzt noch jemals. Denn erstlich, weil die Musik die Seele schnt und sie zu allem Bessern erzieht, wenn sie ordentlich gemacht ist; dann ist sie wieder eine gute Begleitung bei allen freudigen und trben Zustnden und bewahrt vor dem berdruss, den man sonst empfinden mute; endlich macht sie uns fr alle Arten von Schwachheiten und Leiden gefeit, wodurch der Staat frtglich und stark wird. Und nun will ich Euch noch eine andre Wahrheit sagen: es kommt sehr viel darauf an, ob der Mann einen guten Sinn fr Musik hat oder nicht. Denn wenn einer nicht recht versteht, was er sagt, so ist er nicht minder als der, welcher gar nichts spricht, denn wer nicht versteht, was er sagt, der redet nicht, sondern schreit. Dieses aber, da jeder, der gesinnt ist, das Rechte zu tun, im Gebrauche der Musik sich zu erhitzen pflegt und den Anfall der Leidenschaften hintrgt, das zeigt sich deutlich genug an dem Gesange, welchen unser Freund Hieronymos uns vorspielt. Aber noch mehr, wenn ihr euch daran erinnert, was gestern nacht vorgefallen ist. Ihr habt doch wohl gesehen, da der Alte, sobald er seinen Liedbegier abgeschlafen hatte, seine Ungeduld ber die Verzgerung des Auftrags fortgesetzt hatte und diese Ungeduld ihm eine sptere Ruhe verdarb. Wenn nun dieses in einem alten Manne vorkommt, so ist es doch wohl natrlich, da es sich desto leichter in jngere Leute mischt, sobald der Mensch nicht mit den Begriffen in seinem Innern, die ihn treiben, zufrieden ist, wodurch es entsteht, da er nie ruhig bliebe und in allem Laster die Grsse seiner Leidenschaften zu studieren htte. Und nun fragt mich, ob solche Leute das beste Fruchtbarkeitsmittel sind? Oder wollen wir lieber solche Geschfte an Vertraute vertrauen, die von Natur gemtlich sind und nicht leicht von ihrer Ruhe abzubringen sind? Nun, da wir hieraus gesehen haben, warum Musik nuzlich ist, wollen wir weiter gehen und sehen, was fr Art von Musik am ntzigsten ist. Es ist klar, da diejenige am nutzbringendsten ist, welche am ntzigsten ist fr die Erziehung der Jugend; denn wir wollen ja den Staat fr die Kinder unterrichten, nicht fr die Erwachsenen. Nun, was ist fr die Jugend ntzlich? +Active character: Socrates, Adeimantus" Socrates. Nicht wahr, Freund? Was fr ein glckliches Volk sind sie doch! Sie wissen nicht, was Recht und Unrecht ist; und da mgen sie doch immer der Regierer bleiben, solange ich lebe. Adeimantus. Und das wrde nie endigen. Wenn man nur durch die Wissenschaften dumm macht, so wird es ebenso viel Menschen geben, die vernnftig sind und sich durch die Wissenschaften abfinden knnen. Socrates. Das kannst du wohl denken, wenn du dich nach allen Seiten hin umsiehst; aber wer sollte uns das beweisen? Doch ich habe mich oft gedacht: Wenn wir in der Republik ein Gesetz machen wollten, wie wir den Gelehrten behandeln sollten, so mchte es unter andern sein, da sie ihre Schulden nicht bezahlen drfen. Adeimantus. Was meinst du damit? Socrates. Nun, ich meine, man soll ihnen nichts von ihrem Lohn geben, bis sie einen Beruf lernen, womit sie ihr Leben bestreiten knnen. Adeimantus. Ganz richtig! Socrates. Aber wenn du in einem Staat die Musiker verlangst, so mu er auch eine Anzahl Musiklehrer haben, um den Nachwuchs zu erhalten. Adeimantus. Ja, ja, wenn er nur berhaupt nicht ganz ohne Musik bleiben wollte. Socrates. So sei denn bereit, da sie alle zusammen ein halbes Pfund Silber im Monat bekommen sollen. Adeimantus. Wie kann dir das einfallen? Ein halbes Pfund Silber im Monat! Was wollen die tun? Socrates. Wie ein jeder will, mein Freund; die Kunst lehrt sie nur, an die Instrumente zu klopfen, sonst nichts. Adeimantus. Du bist wahnsinnig, Glaukos! Socrates. Das wei ich nicht, mein Freund. Aber ich kann mirs vorstellen, da ein Mann, der in einer Republik mit dieser Kunst zu tun hat, nicht leicht der Fruchtbarste werden und ein Kind zur Welt bringen wird, das ihm gleichkommt. Adeimantus. Wie? Soll nicht ein guter Snger ebenso wie ein guter Redner seinem Sohn seine Geschfte weitergeben? Socrates. Das tue ich nicht gern, mein Freund, was es fr eine Ursache wre, das wei ich nicht. Adeimantus. Ich fr meinen Teil bin ich der Meinung, da die Musik in der Erziehung des jungen Mannes sehr lobenswert ist, wenn sie nur nicht ausgelssig wird. Socrates. Ich meine, wie du sagtest, Adeimantus, nicht ausgelssig. Aber nun noch eins, und du hast genug gesagt: wenn wir ein Gesetz fr die Knaben machen wollen, so mu es sein, da sie die ganze Zeit, wo sie noch unter dem Umgang der Weiber sind, niemanden sehen, den sie lieben knnten, auer ihren Brudern und Vterchen und Mtherchen, und da sie unter dem Gesichtskreise ihrer Eltern bleiben, bis sie fters auf die Wanderschaft gehen und die Huser verlassen mssen. Adeimantus. Das ist der richtige Weg, und ein groes Licht wird uns das alles zeigen, wenn wir ihn erst versuchen. 54 54 "Very true, he said. And when they have made a good beginning in play, and by the helpof music have gained the habit of good order, then this habit of order,in a manner how unlike the lawless play of the others! will accompanythem in all their actions and be a principle of growth to them, andif there be any fallen places a principle in the State will raisethem up again. Very true, he said. Thus educated, they will invent for themselves any lesser rules whichtheir predecessors have altogether neglected. What do you mean? I mean such things as these: --when the young are to be silent beforetheir elders; how they are to show respect to them by standing andmaking them sit; what honour is due to parents; what garments or shoesare to be worn; the mode of dressing the hair; deportment and mannersin general. You would agree with me? @@ -1329,14 +1329,14 @@ Yes, he said; the States are as bad as the men; and I am very farfrom praising t But do you not admire, I said, the coolness and dexterity of theseready ministers of political corruption? Yes, he said, I do; but not of all of them, for there are some whomthe applause of the multitude has deluded into the belief that theyare really statesmen, and these are not much to be admired. What do you mean? I said; you should have more feeling for them. Whena man cannot measure, and a great many others who cannot measure declarethat he is four cubits high, can he help believing what they say?" "Summary: A conversation about the importance of education and how it shapes a person's future. -Enunciation: Dialogue between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy -Active character: Adeimantus, Socrates" "Adeimantus, well said; but let me ask you a question: What is the nature and what are the advantages of education?"""" Then he answered and said, No bad questions come out of that fountain. Any one may ask any questions he pleases, and I will try to answer them, if they are within my knowledge."""" He who is desireless and free from envy, Adeimantus, is sleeping a sweet sleep, if his natural intelligence can sleep. Of such a man Glaucon, no story could ever be told; if you were never to cease talking to him about virtue and of the nature and qualities of good and evil, he would pass his whole life in hearing you, and would seem to be in the happiest condition."" And such an one, Socrates, I suppose to have the greatest possible share of temperance?"" Yes,"" he said, ""and he first of all understands the best part of himself and therefore gives to it the place which is worthy of it."" Then shall we say, as before, that he who has most temperance is best able to guard and preserve the divine principle within him?"""" That again,"" he said, ""is evident."" The universal spirit, Glaucon, dwells with him always like a god; there is no dividing them; he is just and noble and good; he will not suffer the wickedness of others to gain an advantage over himself; he has courage, magnanimity, and affability; he is a lover of wisdom, a teacher, a companion, a follower, a friend of God, and of man; he will do the worst things that a bad man may do; but the good he will never do."" Yes,"" he said, ""that is quite certain, Socrates."" And surely there ought only to be this one law, as the saying goes, 'Do good and abstain from evil,' for the other is so unlike itself that they cannot even rightly be mentioned together."""" And to this rule of many virtues is added the beautiful form of temperance?"""" Yes,"" he said, ""like fair proportion, and every other beauty."" And when order and skill have been imparted to the noble disposition and sense, and all the intellectual faculties have been trained by education in childhood, and thus nurtured through the various stages of life, will not such a nature, I asked, be the fairest and best appointed and most perfect of natures?"""" I think so,"" he replied. And does not that nature, when fully developed, gain her own freewill, and bear rule over herself, and desist from dominion over others?"""" I should say so."" And will not such a virtue, Glaucon, when arrived at full growth, desire above all things the honourable, and set honour before all other goods?"""" To be sure."" Let us see whether there is not another step in the progression: When a man has proceeded up the diadic classes of virtue, and so at last approached the honorific class, he will reflect that this is the flower of humanity, being the governors and nurses of the virtues; and he will want to excel in them, as in those which preceded; he will contrive and cross-examine and reflect within himself, and examine other men and state governments, and hold up true virtue in contrast to human notions of it, and make trial of himself and others, and grieve and take pleasure in opposite things; he will use and be used by true judgment, and this in the work of government, where he may be able to found a state or a kingdom, bringing peace to the citizens, and saving and ennobling them, or he will seek into the nature of the highest truth, and conflict with the ungrudging exercise of that venerable and awful quality which we named after the name of temperance, and there, like gross flesh upon the bones, will be joined to it the muscle of courage, and then the might and strength of wisdom, all of which he whom the fortuitous lot sets in the places where these sorts of labours and contests are offered to him, must perceive in himself and in others, and dangers and difficulties await him in every sort of enterprise; and yet he perseveres and persists, not because he is compelled thereto by fear, nor deters him neither opinion of man nor God, nor does the bodily pain which is probable or inevitable withdraw him; but having measured the height from which he hath fallen, and considering the strength which he now possesses, he exerts himself to surmount the danger which oppresses him, and to draw himself up and ascend again, and so to approach as near as he can to the happy life of old."" " +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: Adeimantus, Socrates" Adeimantus, I said, we must not fail to notice that the makers of the story have told us, and in common sense we must admit, that there is nothing which makes a man grow more than education, if he be naturally intelligent. Yes, he said, and quite right too. Then let us consider whether in education there are many points or few at which the virtue of a state may be affected. I conceive, he replied, that there are but few. And what are they? Did you never think about them? I should like to hear what they are. Here are three, I said: first, the care of the young; secondly, the custody of the weapons; thirdest, the custody of foreign women; for there will be the three sorts of provision. Then I do not think that in these particulars there can be any difference between us. But there are many other things in which I believe that we differ greatly; and of one sort of difference I will make a trial. The citizens have been distinguished into four classes, each having a different function. Of these four classes the last two were called warriors, and their business was to protect the whole state: This they could only do when they were armed and good soldiers. 55 55 "Nay, he said, certainly not in that case. Well, then, do not be angry with them; for are they not as good asa play, trying their hand at paltry reforms such as I was describing;they are always fancying that by legislation they will make an endof frauds in contracts, and the other rascalities which I was mentioning,not knowing that they are in reality cutting off the heads of a hydra? Yes, he said; that is just what they are doing. I conceive, I said, that the true legislator will not trouble himselfwith this class of enactments whether concerning laws or the constitutioneither in an ill-ordered or in a well-ordered State; for in the formerthey are quite useless, and in the latter there will be no difficultyin devising them; and many of them will naturally flow out of ourprevious regulations. What, then, he said, is still remaining to us of the work of legislation? @@ -1359,13 +1359,13 @@ Of course. There is the knowledge of the carpenter; but is that the sort of know Certainly not; that would only give a city the reputation of skillin carpentering. Then a city is not to be called wise because possessing a knowledgewhich counsels for the best about wooden implements? Certainly not. Nor by reason of a knowledge which advises about brazen pots, I said,nor as possessing any other similar knowledge?" "Summary: The speaker discusses the role of legislation in a city and emphasizes the importance of religion. -Enunciation: First-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Active character: Socrates, Glaucon" I had an idea that the city in question was a certain well-known modern metropolis, but I thought it best not to say so. “The first thing,” said Socrates, “is that they should be given good and wholesome laws for their guidance. Then the second thing is, if possible, that they should have no other city by the side of them, or at least no large city with which they may become contaminated; for you know what happens when two cities are near together. They can’t help interfering with one another’s business, and there is always enmity between them. And this will be more likely to happen to us if we allow our citizens to travel abroad, and thus see how different men live in other places; for then they will begin to envy them, and want to change their way of life, and perhaps even to run away from their own country. Therefore it will be better for them never to travel anywhere except to our own colonies.” “That is certainly true,” I said; “but suppose now that some god were to bid us make such a city as we were describing, would we not be compelled to let them go abroad, since we can hardly think of making anything without employing foreigners?” “Yes, certainly,” he replied; “and even if we made a city quite by ourselves, we could not keep out of the company of strangers who would come to visit us.” “And yet,” I said, “we must surely prevent the people of our city from associating with any but Hellenes, and we must try to keep them pure and unmixed.” “Why, yes, my friend,” he answered, “that is clearly necessary; and indeed, if we were not careful in this respect, we might find that our city was not unlike a harlot, who first seduces and then deserts her own husband, and having children by another man, declares that the true father is the one whom she has left.” “What do you mean, Socrates?” I said. “Do you think that there is any danger of Athenians deserting Hellas, and taking up with some foreign race?” “No,” he said, “I am not afraid of that; but I should like to know whether we shall not find it difficult to prevent our young men from falling in love with foreign women who are admitted into our city, and also with strange gods and strange modes of worship.” “That, Socrates,” I said, “may indeed be a difficulty.” “Well, but I dare say you know that there are certain persons in Hellas who are called sophists?” “I have heard of them,” I said. “And have you any knowledge of them?” “Not very much; only I have been told that they wander about of their own free will, and make the round of the various States, in order, as they say, to educate the youth.” “And do you mean to imply, Socrates, that they are dangerous people, who ought not to be allowed to come to Athens?” +Active character: Socrates, Glaucon" "I shall never forget it. There was a man in the audience who said, 'My God! If I had known that this sort of thing was going to be going on I would not have wasted my time coming here.' That is what I call legislation for you."""" """"And what do you think about it?"""" he asked me. Well, I thought that if the man really meant what he said then all I could say was that he was a fool. But if he did not mean it and was only trying to get his own back after having been bored by the speech, then he was a dirty brute. For it was perfectly obvious that Socrates was just being himself and doing what he always does when he speaks in public, which is to try to find out what people know and make them use their minds. In fact it was precisely because he was being so frank and open with us all that we were able to take such an active part in the discussion. And as for the subject matter of the speech it was clear that he was putting it across very well, at least as far as I could tell, but then I am no judge of those things."""" You are right there,"" he said. ""You are no judge of literature. And you can bet your bottom dollar that neither was that guy in the audience."""" Well, Glaucon, what do you think?"" I said. Is Socrates a great orator?"""" Hell no!"" he said. ""He isn't even a good speaker. He doesn't have any style. But he's got something better than style, he's got brains."""" Yes, yes,"" I said. ""But is he a great teacher?"""" No."" It was my turn now. He seemed amused at my zeal. What do you mean, no?"" I said. I mean no."" But surely he must be a great teacher,"" I said. ""He has taught Plato, Xenophon, Aristotle and myself. Isn't that enough to prove it?"""" Not at all."" But why not?"" Because he hasn't taught anyone anything."" I stared at him, open-mouthed. """"But that's ridiculous!"""" I said. """"Everyone knows that he has taught everyone."""" Nonsense,"" he said. ""No one has ever learnt anything from him."""" So he was a fool then?"" I said. Absolutely,"" he said. ""A fool and a charlatan. He is nothing but a confidence trickster."""" I don't believe you,"" I said. ""He may not be a great orator but he is certainly a great philosopher and he has taught me everything I know about philosophy."""" Then you are not much of a pupil,"" he said. ""For all you know is nothing. Philosophy is the art of knowing nothing. Now shut up and listen to me. I've been waiting for you all day and I'm starving."""" He rang the bell and ordered dinner. The waiter brought it in on a tray and set it down between us. " 56 56 "Not by reason of any of them, he said. Nor yet by reason of a knowledge which cultivates the earth; thatwould give the city the name of agricultural? Yes. Well, I said, and is there any knowledge in our recently founded Stateamong any of the citizens which advises, not about any particularthing in the State, but about the whole, and considers how a Statecan best deal with itself and with other States? There certainly is. And what is knowledge, and among whom is it found? I asked. @@ -1385,16 +1385,16 @@ I mean that courage is a kind of salvation. Salvation of what? Of the opinion re If you please. You know, I said, that dyers, when they want to dye wool for makingthe true sea-purple, begin by selecting their white colour first;this they prepare and dress with much care and pains, in order thatthe white ground may take the purple hue in full perfection. The dyeingthen proceeds; and whatever is dyed in this manner becomes a fastcolour, and no washing either with lyes or without them can take awaythe bloom. But, when the ground has not been duly prepared, you willhave noticed how poor is the look either of purple or of any othercolour. Yes, he said; I know that they have a washed-out and ridiculous appearance." "Summary: The text discusses the knowledge and virtues of the guardians in a recently founded State. Narrative arc: Exposition -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation Active character: Socrates, interlocutor -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" 'You see, I was thinking of how extraordinary it is that a man who has been taught nothing but the rough-and-tumble of life should be able to make such good guesses about people's characters and motives. It makes me feel as if there were some kind of natural shrewdness that everybody has, like the sense of smell or taste, which may lie dormant for years but which comes to the surface when the occasion arises.' 'Yes,' said Socrates; 'and the odd thing is that the guardians of our new State are bound to have this gift in a very high degree from the moment they are born. For they will be reared on stories of men's achievements and failures, and the consequences that followed them, until by the time they are grown up they will have acquired an instinct for knowing people's characters at a glance, just as you might expect an oyster-catcher to develop a taste for oysters.' 'I don't quite see why that should be,' said his companion. 'Well, what do you suppose would happen if we sent children to the seaside without telling them that the sea was wet?' 'They would very soon find out,' said the other. 'And so with the world and its ways. If you leave a child to himself he will soon discover where the truth lies, won't he? And then, of course, the more often he gets knocked down the quicker he will learn not to run into the same trap again. Then there is the fact that a man who can read and write and cipher will always have a few more chances than one who cannot. Besides, a certain amount of knowledge is necessary even for the mere purpose of getting a living. You must know enough to buy and sell things, and to haggle over their price, and to give orders to servants, and so on. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" In that State there will be no one who is not a philosopher, who will not by his nature have knowledge of the true being of every thing. This was the first and greatest step towards making the foundation of a State which is truly and entirely just.” “That was said long before your time, Socrates.” “Yes,” I replied; “but we were speaking of the guardians of such a State. These must be those who are philosophers, as I am saying. And they will also be warriors, having been trained in the arts of war from youth upwards, but only employing their warfare against unjust acts, which they will seek to prevent, not against men.” “Why, then,” he said, “you would have them both philosophical and warlike?” “Certainly,” I replied; “and I do not see why this should be thought impossible by any one.” “You know,” he said, “that men are always asking why a thing has come into existence? I mean, for instance, why have houses or shoes come into existence, or anything else that we require? Now the reason, as I suppose, is that these things afford us pleasure and security, and so on: are we not right in saying so?” “Certainly.” “Then what advantage is there to us in philosophy, or why is it that we have a desire for it, if not because it tends to make us live in greater happiness and peace of mind?” “Quite true.” “And we acknowledge that happiness and peace of mind are best preserved when there is moderation and order in the state, and knowledge and thought in the individual?” “Very true.” “Then he who knows that moderation and order in the state, and knowledge and thought in the individual, make men happy, may be justly said to know how men become happy? May not be said to know this?” “He certainly may.” “Then he who knows the bearers of goodness knows also the source of happiness?” “He certainly does.” “But he who knows the source of happiness in man, knows also the whole of human nature?” “He certainly does.” “Then he who knows human nature will necessarily be the best judge of human institutions?” “True,” he said. “Then this is the nature of the virtue of a guardian, that he knows when to use and when to abstain from the possession of gold and silver, and all other riches and forms of wealth?” “Yes, he will know when to use and when to abstain.” “And so, my noble friend, I said, he who knows when to pursue and when to abstain from any object of pursuit, will best know how to superintend and to guard, unless he should be altogether a fool.” “There can be no doubt about that,” he said. “And this, as I believe, Anonymus 1, is the reason why the world calls a trustee wise when he shows himself skilful in superintending and guarding other men’s property. 57 57 "Then now, I said, you will understand what our object was in selectingour soldiers, and educating them in music and gymnastic; we were contrivinginfluences which would prepare them to take the dye of the laws inperfection, and the colour of their opinion about dangers and of everyother opinion was to be indelibly fixed by their nurture and training,not to be washed away by such potent lyes as pleasure --mightier agentfar in washing the soul than any soda or lye; or by sorrow, fear,and desire, the mightiest of all other solvents. And this sort ofuniversal saving power of true opinion in conformity with law aboutreal and false dangers I call and maintain to be courage, unless youdisagree. But I agree, he replied; for I suppose that you mean to exclude mereuninstructed courage, such as that of a wild beast or of a slave --this,in your opinion, is not the courage which the law ordains, and oughtto have another name. Most certainly. Then I may infer courage to be such as you describe? Why, yes, said I, you may, and if you add the words 'of a citizen,'you will not be far wrong; --hereafter, if you like, we will carrythe examination further, but at present we are we w seeking not forcourage but justice; and for the purpose of our enquiry we have saidenough. @@ -1416,17 +1416,17 @@ Yes. And if there be any State in which rulers and subjects will be agreedas to Undoubtedly. And the citizens being thus agreed among themselves, in which classwill temperance be found --in the rulers or in the subjects? In both, as I should imagine, he replied. Do you observe that we were not far wrong in our guess that temperancewas a sort of harmony?" "Summary: The speaker discusses the concept of courage and its relationship to justice and temperance. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Plato's philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The speaker, the interlocutor -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "I am not so sure of that. I don't know what you are talking about. You had better start at the beginning and give me a definition of courage."""" Well, courage is one of the cardinal virtues, isn't it?"" Yes, but let's have your own definition."" Courage,"" I said, ""is the quality which knows how to wait and when to strike. It comes from keeping cool in the face of danger and knowing just when to jump into it. There is no such thing as unnecessary courage. When you take chances you run risks, and you've got to be able to face them. That's where courage comes in."""" Well,"" he said, ""that sounds plausible enough, but what do you know about it?"""" Nothing whatever,"" I said. ""But Plato was right. The wise man must always be brave, because he has more to lose than anyone else. And the fool can afford to be afraid."""" The fool!"" he said. ""That's a new idea, that is. Let's hear some more about it."""" As far as I can make out,"" I said, ""the fool never looks before he leaps. He takes chances for no reason at all except that they happen to come along. If he sees a man with a gun pointing a revolver at his head, he jumps for joy. If he gets hold of a bomb, he throws it into the nearest street-car. If he finds himself in a burning building, he rushes up the stairs to put out the fire. He does these things because he is foolish. He doesn't think. And if he doesn't think, he doesn't know when he is in danger. So there is nothing to frighten him. He has no sense of proportion. In fact, he hasn't any sense at all. He's like a character in a Greek tragedy who walks straight into disaster without ever stopping to think why he wants to do it. That's the kind of fool I mean."""" He nodded his head. """"You're right,"""" he said. """"I ought to know. I have met quite a few of them around here recently."""" It seems to me,"" I said, ""that the same sort of thing applies to justice and temperance. A just man knows when he is doing right. He may sometimes be mistaken, but he tries to find out what the truth is, and he obeys it. And he is temperate because he understands the relation between the individual and the rest of mankind. He realizes that he is a member of a community, and that he must obey the laws of that community. That's what temperance means, and that's why it's so important for a detective to be temperate. But the fool won't understand anything about that. He'll want to do his own thing and go his own way and do whatever he pleases. And that's exactly what makes him a fool. Because sooner or later he will get caught and pay the price for his folly."""" " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "I am not afraid of death. I like to see you squirm when I take the chance of it, just for kicks; but deep down, underneath, I am not afraid."""" The very intensity of his stare was driving me back toward the door; and yet it also held me there against my will. He was speaking now in a harsh, dry whisper: """"Courage is like all virtues It is not so very precious as some people think. You can get it anywhere, for nothing. Go into any gutter and pick it up. Courage is cheap; you have to be a coward to get it. The brave man is the one who can look calmly at the worst that can happen. I can look on abject failure, disgrace, bankruptcy, imprisonment, torture, death, and what are those to me? In comparison, what is there that I fear? Nothing. I fear no living man. My courage is a rock, and nothing can shake it."""" Then he paused, and a smile slowly spread over his face, until it became a snarl of contempt. Suddenly his voice rose again, and now it was shrill with a horrible gaiety. His words came out between his clenched teeth, as if they were torn from him by torture: Justice! Temperance! What do I care for justice or temperance? For your own peace of mind, keep out of my way!"""" He had risen from his chair and was standing near me, and then I saw what I had not seen before: the thin film of sweat upon his forehead, and the twitching of his fingers. As I turned and opened the door, he leaned forward quickly and caught my wrist. When I looked at him, I thought I saw terror in his eyes. Then he dropped my arm and stood back. He said quietly: """"Good night, Mr. Halliday. Remember this: whatever happens, don't try to interfere with me."""" CHAPTER FIVE THE KEY TO THE LOCKED ROOM At the time, I did not know whether his last words were a threat or a promise; and I still don't know. But I've taken them for a warning since then, and I have not tried to interfere with him. If I had, I should probably have been killed in a tragic accident within twenty-four hours. And if I hadn't been killed, I should have been glad of it; for I should certainly have been sent to prison for a long term of years. That's another thing I learned from Teddy. I have known other criminals since then, but Teddy was the first criminal I ever knew. He was not only the first, he was the best. He would have made a good sergeant-major of police, or a good headmaster. Perhaps he may be both these things now, for all I know. Certainly, he had the knack of making people do exactly as he wanted them to do. " 58 58 "Why so? Why, because temperance is unlike courage and wisdom, each of whichresides in a part only, the one making the State wise and the othervaliant; not so temperance, which extends to the whole, and runs throughall the notes of the scale, and produces a harmony of the weaker andthe stronger and the middle class, whether you suppose them to bestronger or weaker in wisdom or power or numbers or wealth, or anythingelse. Most truly then may we deem temperance to be the agreement ofthe naturally superior and inferior, as to the right to rule of either,both in states and individuals. I entirely agree with you. And so, I said, we may consider three out of the four virtues to havebeen discovered in our State. The last of those qualities which makea state virtuous must be justice, if we only knew what that was. The inference is obvious. The time then has arrived, Glaucon, when, like huntsmen, we shouldsurround the cover, and look sharp that justice does not steal away,and pass out of sight and escape us; for beyond a doubt she is somewherein this country: watch therefore and strive to catch a sight of her,and if you see her first, let me know. @@ -1443,15 +1443,15 @@ I cannot, but I should like to be told. Because I think that this is the only vi That follows of necessity. If we are asked to determine which of these four qualities by itspresence contributes most to the excellence of the State, whetherthe agreement of rulers and subjects, or the preservation in the soldiersof the opinion which the law ordains about the true nature of dangers,or wisdom and watchfulness in the rulers, or whether this other whichI am mentioning, and which is found in children and women, slave andfreeman, artisan, ruler, subject, --the quality, I mean, of everyone doing his own work, and not being a busybody, would claim thepalm --the question is not so easily answered. Certainly, he replied, there would be a difficulty in saying which." "Summary: The speaker discusses the virtues of temperance, courage, and wisdom in a state, and suggests that justice is the last virtue to be discovered. Narrative arc: Reflective -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The speaker and Glaucon -Time setting: Contemporary" "If you and I were really to discuss the matter, it might be said that a just state would be one in which there is an unchanging order of virtue; and that no other is possible. And if this is true of the state, there is much more reason why it should be true of the individual. Would not each part of the individual have to perform one unchanging work throughout life? Is there any other kind of life than this? Can you imagine anyone working at the same thing all his life?"""" No,"" I replied; ""but to suppose that he could work always at the same things seems as absurd as to suppose that a state or city could always attend to the same things."" Suppose then,"" he said, ""that there are four principles in our nature, corresponding to the four virtues of which we were just now speaking. Temperance would be the principle of keeping the spirit within the limits of reason; courage would be the principle of enabling us to face danger and pain; wisdom would be the power of distinguishing the true from the false; justice would be the principle of giving every man his due. Now suppose that these four principles exist in us, and that each has its own proper work, and does nothing else but its own work. What will happen? The temperate man will keep his spirit within the limits of reason; the courageous man will face danger and pain; the wise man will distinguish the true from the false; the just man will give every man his due. The result will be that they will be just, because their tempers will not make them unjust, nor their fears prevent them from doing what is right, nor their ignorance cause them to do wrong, nor their selfishness induce them to act with partiality."""" Very good,"" I said; ""I think that the argument proves that justice is one of the virtues of man, and that the just man is virtuous and good."""" But perhaps,"" he said, ""you may still think that we have not yet found out what justice is."" You are quite right,"" I answered; ""we have not found that out yet."""" Then I must tell you another story,"" he said, ""which is more difficult to understand; for this next step in the argument is very hard. It is a strange fact,"" he continued, ""that men, when they are acting rightly, do so involuntarily, but when they are acting wrongly they do so voluntarily; and again, when they are acting justly, they do so involuntarily, but when they are acting unjustly, they do so voluntarily. Now this might be explained in various ways, but I think that we can best explain it by supposing that there are two ruling principles in the soul, doing battle with one another, of which the one is unreasonable and the other reasonable. " +Time setting: 1950s" "He'll have to be a nice guy. I hope he is."""" * * * * * If the state is really to be fortunate and happy, it must be governed by the virtue of temperance, which moderates the appetites. But you can't have temperance without courage. It's like asking a man with an outsize appetite to sit in a darkened room. He'll eat anything that comes to hand. So if our state is going to be happy, it will have to be courageous as well as temperant. We need men who are willing to die for their country."""" * * * * * The state is now doing very nicely, Glaucon. But we still haven't got justice right yet. It may not seem so to you, but it does to me. And I'm the only one who counts. You're just my audience."""" * * * * * Justice is a fine thing,"" says Socrates. ""And I'm sure we'd all like to know what it is, wouldn't we?"""" I'm glad you think so,"" says Socrates. ""I do too."""" * * * * * If we want to find out about justice, then we should ask ourselves first, What sort of people would a perfectly just state require? They'd have to be men of wisdom, of course. The wisest men in the city would have to be philosophers. It would be foolish to trust the state to anyone else."""" * * * * * Here Socrates begins to laugh. He laughs and laughs. Finally he says, 'You've hit upon something there, Glaucon. It's a good joke, isn't it? A philosopher king! Wouldn't that be a sight to see? The world would come to an end before they could find enough philosophers to run even a small village.' Then Socrates begins to cough. He wipes his eyes and says, """"Look at us, Glaucon. Haven't we been thinking too much? Don't you feel confused? Don't you feel your head spinning?"""" " 59 59 "Then the power of each individual in the State to do his own workappears to compete with the other political virtues, wisdom, temperance,courage. Yes, he said. And the virtue which enters into this competition is justice? Exactly. Let us look at the question from another point of view: Are not therulers in a State those to whom you would entrust the office of determiningsuits at law? @@ -1468,18 +1468,18 @@ Like, he replied. The just man then, if we regard the idea of justice only, will He will. And a State was thought by us to be just when the three classes inthe State severally did their own business; and also thought to betemperate and valiant and wise by reason of certain other affectionsand qualities of these same classes? True, he said. And so of the individual; we may assume that he has the same threeprinciples in his own soul which are found in the State; and he maybe rightly described in the same terms, because he is affected inthe same manner?" "Summary: The text discusses the concept of justice and its application in both the State and the individual. Narrative arc: Philosophical exploration -Enunciation: Dialogue between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical dialogue -Literary movement: Platonism +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, interlocutor -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s Diegetic time: A few minutes -Fuzzy place: Unnamed places such as the State and the individual's soul" "But isn't that a very roundabout way of getting at the truth? Isn't it like trying to get at justice in the State first and then coming down to justice in the individual man?"""" Exactly, Socrates; we can't see anything else in the individual unless we have first looked at justice in the State. And surely you must agree that the justice which the individual has is something different from that of the State?"""" Yes, I do agree."" Then now for the next step. Suppose that we imagine a single house with many inhabitants which we shall call Athens, as having many citizens in it who are known by names, such as Theseus, Melesias, Diocles, etc. Suppose also that each of them is distinguished by his own peculiar character, and that one of them, Melesias, has a quarrel with another, Diocles, and is attempting to rob him of his property."""" That's quite probable,"" said the other, ""and he would be a very honest citizen if he failed."" Well, now suppose that some one were to come and ask us whether Melesias was acting justly or unjustly in his attempt to rob Diocles, what would we say?"" Why, he was certainly doing wrong, and was therefore acting unjustly."" And yet, my dear friend, I cannot help thinking that there is some connection between the justice of the individual and that of the State. What do you think about it?"" I am sure I don't know what you mean."" Well, let us put it this way. Is not Melesias a part of Athens?"""" Certainly he is."" Then, since he is a part of Athens, justice and injustice must be a part also of Athens. But then, justice and injustice are also parts of Melesias, and so, according to our previous argument, justice in Melesias must be the same as justice in Athens."""" But that is impossible,"" cried the other. Why?"" Because they are both different things."" They may be different, but still, according to our theory, they must be alike. For instance, here is a couch which belongs to me, and here is an arm-chair which likewise belongs to me. Now, the arm-chair is not the couch, nor is the couch the arm-chair. But still they are both mine, and so they must be somehow the same as well as different. Similarly, justice in the State will be somehow the same as justice in the individual, although it will also be different from it. " +Fuzzy place: Unnamed places such as the State and the individual's soul" "But the State has to have some sort of justice, or else it won't work. And the individual soul has to have justice, or else it can't exist. What's this 'justice' you talk about?"""" I don't know. The oracle said so. But if it wants to be explained, maybe we can explain it."""" I wish it would,"" said the interlocutor gruffly. ""If a man steals and gets caught, that's just. If he doesn't steal and doesn't get caught, that's not just. I see that much for myself. But what's the rest of it? I'm tired of hearing about it."""" Then there was silence. At last Socrates said: """"I've been thinking about what you said. It's a good idea. Why not let me do the talking now?"""" Okay."" So Socrates began to speak again. He said: """"You're right about the things in the State being just when they are the way they are supposed to be. That's why the oracle says it is wise. But we have to go on from there. How did you feel when you were in the army?"" Well, all right, I guess."" Did you like it?"""" No, I didn't."" Wasn't it because you had to obey orders, and couldn't do as you pleased?"""" Yes, I suppose so."" Would you have liked to be your own general?"""" No, but I wouldn't have minded commanding a platoon."" You would have had to obey another officer, wouldn't you?"""" Yes."" You mean you wouldn't have liked to command a whole division?"""" Hell no! Not unless I was the highest general."" Even then, wouldn't you have had to obey orders from above?"""" Sure, but maybe those orders would have been sensible orders. Who knows?"""" But who gave the orders to the gods, up above?"""" Nobody."" Then the State is better than the individual. In the State there's somebody to give the orders. In the individual there isn't any."""" That's true,"" said the interlocutor thoughtfully. ""And if you think about it, it's hard to imagine how an individual could live without obeying orders. Take my stomach, for instance. It gives me orders. If I didn't obey them, I'd die."""" Yes, that's true,"" said Socrates. ""But maybe the gods are like a big stomach. They give orders to everybody, and everybody obeys them."""" Maybe so,"" said the other. ""But does that make it just?"""" I think it does. Remember what we said before. The gods made us, and everything in the world. So they ought to know what's best for us and everything. Whatever they tell us to do must be for our benefit, and therefore just."""" Yes,"" said the other, ""but what's it got to do with justice in the State?"" Everything,"" said Socrates. ""We started out by saying that the State is like a single person. " 60 60 "Certainly, he said. Once more then, O my friend, we have alighted upon an easy question--whether the soul has these three principles or not? An easy question! Nay, rather, Socrates, the proverb holds that hardis the good. Very true, I said; and I do not think that the method which we areemploying is at all adequate to the accurate solution of this question;the true method is another and a longer one. Still we may arrive ata solution not below the level of the previous enquiry. @@ -1493,17 +1493,17 @@ Impossible. Still, I said, let us have a more precise statement of terms, lestwe Very true. And suppose the objector to refine still further, and to draw thenice distinction that not only parts of tops, but whole tops, whenthey spin round with their pegs fixed on the spot, are at rest andin motion at the same time (and he may say the same of anything whichrevolves in the same spot), his objection would not be admitted byus, because in such cases things are not at rest and in motion inthe same parts of themselves; we should rather say that they haveboth an axis and a circumference, and that the axis stands still,for there is no deviation from the perpendicular; and that the circumferencegoes round. But if, while revolving, the axis inclines either to theright or left, forwards or backwards, then in no point of view canthey be at rest. That is the correct mode of describing them, he replied. Then none of these objections will confuse us, or incline us to believethat the same thing at the same time, in the same part or in relationto the same thing, can act or be acted upon in contrary ways." "Summary: The speaker discusses the question of whether the soul has three principles or not, and proposes a method for determining the answer. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Ancient Greek philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, the speaker -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" If the soul has three principles, then the soul of a great man is made up of three souls; and if the soul of a great man is made up of three souls, he will have three sets of feelings about everything. And you must know that if a man has three sets of feelings about anything, his life goes off into three separate channels. He does not know where he is going to; he may be starting for the Isles of the Blest with one side of his soul and go down to Tartarus with the other two; and it is quite as likely to happen as not. That is why we want to find out whether the soul has three principles or not. Socrates. Do you suppose the gods will let us settle the question by talking about it here? The speaker. Certainly they will, if we talk like men who are trying to find out the truth. I don't believe there is a god who doesn't like people who try to find out the truth. If we get on the wrong track, we can easily find out, and then we can try again. When the Cretan says that all Cretans are liars, what do we do? We say, 'No, some of you are telling the truth.' That settles it. Socrates. Exactly; and now tell me how you propose to find out about the soul. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "If the soul has three principles, one of them must be asleep and the other two awake. The sleepers will be those who are not talking or being talked to; the wakers will be the talker and the person addressed."""" Well,"" said Socrates, ""that is simple enough, and I think I can manage it if you will only tell me how to set about it."""" Not at all,"" said the speaker. ""It's a matter of elementary psychology. When a man talks to himself he is talking to his own reason, which is the principle of common sense. Therefore the person addressed in this case will be the common-sense part of the soul."""" He paused again for a moment, then continued: Now listen carefully, because this next bit is rather tricky. When a man talks to his own conscience he is talking to an imaginary person, whom he imagines to be outside him, whereas really he is inside himself. So when a man talks to his conscience he is addressing somebody whom he imagines to be some distance away from him, although he really is very near indeed. Therefore when a man talks to his conscience, he will address the nearest person present as though he were some way off."""" Socrates looked puzzled, and seemed to be struggling with the problem. Then he asked: """"Is there any particular reason why we should suppose that the sleeper will always be the furthest person away?"""" Yes,"" replied the speaker sharply. ""The sleeping dogs lie, don't they? And dogs are animals, aren't they? Therefore the sleeper must be the animal in man, the lowest principle of the soul."""" But supposing there are no dogs?"" demanded Socrates. There won't be any dogs,"" replied the other harshly. ""I've taken every possible precaution against their turning up. They're too dangerous a risk. No, the sleeper will always be the furthest person away unless he happens to be a dog."""" I see,"" said Socrates, ""but what do you suggest I should do if there happen to be dogs about?"""" You'll have to shoot them,"" said the other brutally. ""That's your job, isn't it? It's what you're paid for. If you start worrying about the ethical side of it, you'll never get anywhere."""" Another pause followed, during which Socrates sat scowling thoughtfully into the fire. Then he began speaking in his turn. My friend,"" he said, ""I have been thinking hard about your little theory, and I am afraid I cannot agree with you. In the first place, it seems to me that you have made a mistake in your premises. You seem to take for granted that the sleeper will be the furthest person away. But why should he be? You yourself admit that the sleeper may be the nearest person present."""" Certainly,"" replied the other. ""But he can't be both the nearest and the furthest."" Why not?"" Because if he is nearest, he can't be furthest."" That is a fallacy,"" said Socrates. ""You assume that nearest and furthest are absolute terms. " 61 61 "Certainly not, according to my way of thinking. Yet, I said, that we may not be compelled to examine all such objections,and prove at length that they are untrue, let us assume their absurdity,and go forward on the understanding that hereafter, if this assumptionturn out to be untrue, all the consequences which follow shall bewithdrawn. Yes, he said, that will be the best way. Well, I said, would you not allow that assent and dissent, desireand aversion, attraction and repulsion, are all of them opposites,whether they are regarded as active or passive (for that makes nodifference in the fact of their opposition)? Yes, he said, they are opposites. Well, I said, and hunger and thirst, and the desires in general, andagain willing and wishing, --all these you would refer to the classesalready mentioned. You would say --would you not? --that the soulof him who desires is seeking after the object of his desires; orthat he is drawing to himself the thing which he wishes to possess:or again, when a person wants anything to be given him, his mind,longing for the realisation of his desires, intimates his wish tohave it by a nod of assent, as if he had been asked a question? @@ -1519,11 +1519,11 @@ Certainly. And the much greater to the much less? Yes. And the sometime greater Certainly, he said. And so of more and less, and of other correlative terms, such as thedouble and the half, or again, the heavier and the lighter, the swifterand the slower; and of hot and cold, and of any other relatives; --isnot this true of all of them? Yes. And does not the same principle hold in the sciences? The object ofscience is knowledge (assuming that to be the true definition), butthe object of a particular science is a particular kind of knowledge;I mean, for example, that the science of house-building is a kindof knowledge which is defined and distinguished from other kinds andis therefore termed architecture. Certainly. Because it has a particular quality which no other has? Yes. And it has this particular quality because it has an object of a particularkind; and this is true of the other arts and sciences?" "Summary: The speaker discusses the concept of opposites and their relationship to desire and aversion. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled -Speech standard: Informal, raw +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Active character: The speaker and the person they are speaking with" "That was his picture of the future. I had to laugh. It was too big, it was too cold-blooded. It looked like something that would have been invented by a committee. But that's the kind of thing you get when you take the clean-cut young man and make him Secretary of State. What he was saying was true enough, but I didn't care for his tone of voice, as though he were talking about somebody else, somebody he knew nothing about, some poor fish in a book. That way of talking gets on my nerves. He put his glass down and stared at me. """"You don't think there is any such thing as an opposite?"""" he said. No,"" I answered. ""Not as far as human beings are concerned."" You may call it habit,"" he went on, ""but I always tell the truth. I never tell lies. People who tell lies forget where the truth is, anyway."""" Are there people who tell lies?"" I asked. Of course there are. The whole world's full of them,"" he answered. I had seen this before in him. There was no point in arguing with him. He believed what he believed, and if he wanted to believe the whole human race was made up of liars, it was all right with me. He wouldn't be satisfied until he had told me how much he detested lies, and why he detested them so much. """"I can't stand lies,"""" he repeated. """"Lies are a form of corruption, they lead nowhere; they're just a waste of time. Now I know what I want, and I'm after it. If I wasn't interested in the things I'm interested in, if I didn't want them, I'd be bored stiff."""" So you are interested in them?"" Yes, I am, I can tell you. And one of the things I'm interested in is women."""" How do you mean?"" Oh, well, sex is pretty interesting, isn't it? Why shouldn't it interest me?"""" Why shouldn't it?"" " +Active character: The speaker and the person they are speaking with" The difference between desire and aversion is the same as that between pleasure and pain; which, however, do not always arise from the objects themselves, but oftener from their opposite qualities. The one is a sensation of ease and satisfaction, the other of uneasiness and discontent; and he who is in one extreme will naturally be impatient till he arrives at the other. Hence it may happen that what you have chosen as an object of your desire, may be to another so odious, as to excite his aversion, when once possessed of it; and thus the greatest happiness to you may prove the greatest torment to him: for if there be any thing in this world, that deserves the name of evil, it must be where the person is deprived of all pleasure, and the most exquisite torments are felt by him who has attained that, which was the utmost end and aim of his wishes. But this being so far from answering the end of our desires, must be the most intolerable state of misery imaginable; since nothing can now be wanting to complete our felicity, but what will perpetually increase our miseries. Wherefore let no man presume to fix on himself, or another, any precise and determinate boundaries, either of good or evil; since things may appear to him very different, according to the state of his body, mind, age, education, disposition, company, humour, and numberless other circumstances, which cannot possibly be foreseen, much less comprehended. And therefore I would advise you to take the opinion of several persons, before you fix your choice on anything; and when once you have made the election, remember to look upon yourself as having given up all other things for that particular; otherwise you will find it easier to break through all the laws of God and men, than to make a strict and constant conformity to your own resolutions. It is true, you may alter your opinion; but then you must acknowledge that you did not know better at the time you first resolved, and consequently ought not to be blamed for acting according to your present apprehensions. Thus you see how easily we might remove all those scruples, which are apt to arise from the consideration of opposites, and set them at the right pitch, by observing the proper medium betwixt the extremes, which are equally to be avoided. For if men would be contented to pursue their pleasures with moderation, they would be less solicitous about the attainment of them; and would quickly find out, that, if every thing be weighed in the balance, no enjoyment is equal to that supreme felicity, which arises from the conscience of well-doing, and an entire resignation to the will of God. 62 62 "Yes. Now, then, if I have made myself clear, you will understand my originalmeaning in what I said about relatives. My meaning was, that if oneterm of a relation is taken alone, the other is taken alone; if oneterm is qualified, the other is also qualified. I do not mean to saythat relatives may not be disparate, or that the science of healthis healthy, or of disease necessarily diseased, or that the sciencesof good and evil are therefore good and evil; but only that, whenthe term science is no longer used absolutely, but has a qualifiedobject which in this case is the nature of health and disease, itbecomes defined, and is hence called not merely science, but the scienceof medicine. I quite understand, and I think as you do. Would you not say that thirst is one of these essentially relativeterms, having clearly a relation -- Yes, thirst is relative to drink. And a certain kind of thirst is relative to a certain kind of drink;but thirst taken alone is neither of much nor little, nor of goodnor bad, nor of any particular kind of drink, but of drink only? @@ -1537,16 +1537,16 @@ Yes, he said, we may fairly assume them to be different. Then let us finally determine that there are two principles existingin the soul. And what of passion, or spirit? Is it a third, or akinto one of the preceding? I should be inclined to say --akin to desire. Well, I said, there is a story which I remember to have heard, andin which I put faith. The story is, that Leontius, the son of Aglaion,coming up one day from the Piraeus, under the north wall on the outside,observed some dead bodies lying on the ground at the place of execution.He felt a desire to see them, and also a dread and abhorrence of them;for a time he struggled and covered his eyes, but at length the desiregot the better of him; and forcing them open, he ran up to the deadbodies, saying, Look, ye wretches, take your fill of the fair sight. I have heard the story myself, he said. The moral of the tale is, that anger at times goes to war with desire,as though they were two distinct things." "Summary: The text discusses the concept of relatives and their relationship to one another. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Enlightenment +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Two speakers engaged in a conversation -Time setting: Contemporary -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "Jeg tror ikke. Nej, jeg tror ikke paa det heller."""" Jeg tnker da,"" sagde han. Det er jo ligesom med de gode guder og dem der underjordisk! De har vel alle sammen nogle slig relater?"""" Ja,"" svarer han; ""men der er en stor forskel paa dem. For dem der overjordisk er det jo kun et par ting, de kan gjre sig af, at lge og at vre onde, fordi de egentlig ikke har andet at drive sig med. Men de andre kan gje sig noget andet, de kan pludre og spise og drikke og sove og kvo og ha' det saa godt som dem der overjordisk. Saa du, om du vil se en bedstefader til min fader, saa skal du se en mand, der er blevet tre hundrede og ti aar gammel, og er endnu saa smart og snill som en ung mand. Og han kan stadig gaa rundt, og klbe sig selv og lege med sine ben og sin hale, og han har sin egen logi og sit eget groft silkestk, hvor han sover i halvmrket. Han har ogsaa sin egen udgrdning, som han kan sidde og rote i og lytte til musikken, naar han blir kedelig eller ond; og han har sin egen madepot, hvor der sttes mad for ham hver nat, og da han bliver stiv av alderdommen, og kan ikke greie at holde det fast, ser man til, at han faar rigelige mngdomme af mad paa sin rette tid; og han har ogsaa sin egen opvaskedame, som viser ham alt det rart og formeligste og skaffer ham alt hvad han behver, og passer paa at han ikke faar mig til at komme og spise ved hans bord; thi det var jo ikke rigtig vel at synes. Saa videre har han ogsaa sin egen servitrer, som kalder ham """"Herre"""", og taaler de mest ypperlige ord for ham og smiler og ler og hrmer og flger ham overalt, men bare for at vise, hvordan de elsker ham, og ingen af dem vil forstaa, hvad han siger, thi han taler jo en saa usmukk dialekt, at ingen kommer til at forstaa ham. Til sidst har han ogsaa en charlottinde, som altid sidder ved siden av ham og hnger ved ham, og hvis han bliver kedelig, sier hun """"Herre"""" til ham og ler med ham, eller hvis han gr er hun der og krammer ham og trygger ham og bner sine lber og viser ham sit ansigt og ligner som om hun vil kysse ham, og den charlottinden er jo en karlsund jomfru, som hele livet har vaernet omkring ham og spurgt ham om han har brug for noget, og gjort alt hvad hun kan for at vre ham til hjlp og for at gjre ham lykkelig. Og saaledes lever de, og har det ganske godt, og de kender og elsker hinanden, og de vilde helst leve saadan til evig tid. Men deres far, min faders far, er blit et stykke gal nok, og han vil ikke lade dem leve, og han holder dem fast og lader dem ikke vasne fra hinanden, og de kan ikke skille sig; og saa gar han hen og vrager dem for mange kroner og tager dem med sig hjem. For de er da jo allikevel hans eigendom, som jeg sier; thi fr han blev gal, bar de navnet hans navn, og var hans folk, og tilhrende ham. " +Time setting: 1950s +Diegetic time: A few minutes" For the time being, I was interested only in relatives. “I mean real relatives,” he said. “That’s what it says here: ‘All relatives.’ Not aunts and uncles and stuff like that. It means all the people that are related to you by blood.” He looked at me. “Do you get what I mean?” I nodded, though I didn’t. “It’s got to be blood relatives,” he went on. “The law says they can’t burn up your blood relatives, unless they’re criminals or something. But everybody else is okay. Your grandmother’s okay. Your grandfather’s okay. Your cousin’s okay. All of them.” “Yes,” I said. “But why—” “Here it is,” he said, pointing to a page. “It says, ‘Burn every relative who has ever helped or encouraged you in any way whatsoever.’ And it says, ‘Burn every relative who has ever harmed you in any way whatsoever.’” He laughed. “See? It doesn’t say anything about whether or not they’re bad. You know what this is going to do to you? Your mother was always helping you when you were a kid, and your father too. So they’re both burned. If you had an uncle who gave you a dollar once, even if you don’t remember him, he’s burned. Because he helped you. But suppose you had another uncle who beat you with a belt one time when you were five years old. He’s burned too. Because he harmed you. You see how it works?” “Yes,” I said. “You see how it works,” he said again. “It’s good. It’s very good. This way they can burn everyone in the country, just the way they want. They can burn half the population.” He put his hand on my shoulder. “Are you ready now?” he said. “Yes,” I said. “Then let’s go,” he said. We walked out of the store and started across the street. The sky was overcast, and it seemed cold and bleak and empty, with no color at all, as though some great wind had swept everything away. As we walked along he said, “There used to be a lot of good things in America. A man could have a good life here. But then there was war after war after war, and nobody knew why or for what. After a while there wasn’t much left but death and violence and destruction. When I was a boy, I used to read stories about cowboys and Indians and soldiers and heroes. That was the kind of life most men wanted to live. Now it’s different. Most men don’t want to die. They want to live. They want to eat and sleep and make love and raise families and grow old and die in their beds. They want a quiet life. They don’t want to fight and kill and die. But that isn’t the kind of life they’re allowed to have. 63 63 "Yes; that is the meaning, he said. And are there not many other cases in which we observe that when aman's desires violently prevail over his reason, he reviles himself,and is angry at the violence within him, and that in this struggle,which is like the struggle of factions in a State, his spirit is onthe side of his reason; --but for the passionate or spirited elementto take part with the desires when reason that she should not be opposed,is a sort of thing which thing which I believe that you never observedoccurring in yourself, nor, as I should imagine, in any one else? Certainly not. Suppose that a man thinks he has done a wrong to another, the noblerhe is the less able is he to feel indignant at any suffering, suchas hunger, or cold, or any other pain which the injured person mayinflict upon him --these he deems to be just, and, as I say, his angerrefuses to be excited by them. True, he said. But when he thinks that he is the sufferer of the wrong, then he boilsand chafes, and is on the side of what he believes to be justice;and because he suffers hunger or cold or other pain he is only themore determined to persevere and conquer. His noble spirit will notbe quelled until he either slays or is slain; or until he hears thevoice of the shepherd, that is, reason, bidding his dog bark no more. @@ -1566,13 +1566,13 @@ That follows, of course. We cannot but remember that the justice of the State co We are not very likely to have forgotten, he said. We must recollect that the individual in whom the several qualitiesof his nature do their own work will be just, and will do his ownwork? Yes, he said, we must remember that too. And ought not the rational principle, which is wise, and has the careof the whole soul, to rule, and the passionate or spirited principleto be the subject and ally?" "Summary: The text discusses the relationship between reason, passion, and desire in the human soul. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical dialogue -Active character: Socrates, Glaucon" Und was ist das? Socrates. Das zweite Stckchen, das sich an die Wurzel klmt und zwischen ihr und dem eigentlichen Leib des Menschen liegt. Glaucon. Ich verstehe. Socrates. Nun, da du nun einmal hier vor mir sitzt, so lerne mich nicht nur nach auen, sondern auch nach innen kennen. Was ist nun das innere Ding in dir, das von der Wurzel aufwachst und dich umschlieet und dein Herz nennt? Glaucon. Es ist mein Geist, mein Wesen, mein Seelchen, wie man will. Socrates. Nun, und wo sitzt es? Ist es dort, wo die Gedanken auf- und niedergehen? Nein; das sind nur Bewegungen im Kopfe. So hre ich es gesagt. Oder ist es dort, wo die Empfindungen niederwallen? Nicht wahr, du fhlst, wenn du ein stichhftes Feuer fhrst, da dir die Wange gltet? Ja, lieber Freund, aber ebenso gefhle ich, wenn ich frhliche Kpfe sehe oder lustige Tiere oder bunte Blumen, oder wenn ich Geschichten von Reisen oder Abenteuern hrte. Und doch bin ich weit entfernt, da ich in diesen Fllen sagen knnte: Ich fhl in meinem Innern etwas Lustiges oder Schneres. Vielmehr sieht man deutlich, da die Lust oder das Vergngen ihre Wohnung in den Eingeweiden hat. Sie steigt empor aus den Nieren, wie sie sinkt in den Darm hinein, wenn sie uns zuwider ist. Also nicht da. Und doch mu es etwas geben, das sich freut oder leid tut, sobald irgendeines dieser Vorgnge stattfindet. Glaucon. Wahrhaftig! Socrates. Nun, so halte dich sorgfltig fest und erklare mir, was dieses innere Wesen ist, denn es mu doch sein. Denn wer sagt, da der Mensch zwei Wrzeln habe? Ein solcher Mnch wird wohl niemand finden. Glaucon. Noch nie! Socrates. Sprich also weiter und sage mir, was dieses Wesen ist, das sich freut oder leid tut, und welcher Art sein Leben ist. Glaucon. Sein Leben ist leicht genug zu erraten. Er wird es nicht lange fhren, wenn er sich die schne Welt von auen durch jeden Zutritt ausscht. Es mssen ja alle Sinne gleichzeitig zugleich geffnet sein, wenn einer heiter sein soll. Es wre ganz unmglich, wenn die Blicke in die Himmelsrgigkeit sehen knnten, und das Gehr die wunderbaren Harmonien vernahm, und der Riecher die zarten Dfte einatmete, und der Gaumen reiche Speisen kosten konnte, und das Gefle aller seiner Sinne mit den Trnen des Mitleidens beschlgt war. Das kann nicht anders sein, als da eines von diesen Elementen herrscht und die andern unterwirft, wenn der Mensch heiter sein will. Socrates. Das bist du selbst, der sagts? Glaucon. Ich? Socrates. Nicht wahr, du hast deinen Sinn fr die Schne gebunden, und ihn zur Herrschaft ber deine andern Sinne erhoben? Glaucon. +Active character: Socrates, Glaucon" Socrates. Jetzt, da wir uns ber die Natur der Tugend und des Lasters unterhalten haben, mu ich mich wundern, da wir nicht auch von der alten Frage reden, ob der Vernunft oder der Leidenschaft Vorrang gebhrt, wie du in deinen Phantasien wohl mehr als einmal behauptet hast. Glaukon. Das ist eine ganz neue Frage, die ich noch nie gehrt habe. Socrates. Hm! das verwundert mich! Ich dachte, man habe sie dir schon oft genug gestellt, wenn du dich um deine Wnsche bemhen willst. Denn nicht allein, wer sein eigen Ding treiben will, hat mit sich selbst zu tun; sondern auch, wer ein anderes Menschen Ding machen will, mu mit sich selbst handeln, wenn er etwas zu Stande bringen will. Denn es ist doch nicht mglich, da ein Mensch aus seiner Seele nur dasjenige, was ihm notwendig ist, hervorbringt, weil er nicht ntig hat, was er tglich fr Nahrung und Kleider braucht. Wenn nun dasjenige, womit er sich nhrte, ihn freilich ntigte, so wre es leicht, zu begreifen, wie er nur durch den Druck der Not zur Tat gezwungen wird. Aber wie kommt es, da, sobald er sich wieder geffnet sieht, er sogleich hintrinkt und weiter isst, whrend er sonst nichts so sehr verabscheut als Trinken und Essen? Wie kann er nachher das gleiche tun, das er eben noch verabscheute? Haben wir denn zwei Seelen, eine bessere und eine schlimmere, die sich wechselseitig bekmpfen? Oder ist es nur eine und dieselbe, die ein und demselben Menschen zwei widersprechende Forderungen stellt, ohne da er ihr widerstehen knnte? Oder sind wir vielleicht nicht imstande, unser Wesen zu erkennen? Wieviel Bitteres und Unerquickliches habe ich schon gesehen, das die Menschen gleichsam zum Genusse ihrer Sinne niedertrinken und essen! Und wenn wir vom Geschmack des Lebens abstrahieren, so wrde das auch gelten, was wir zur Nahrung des Geistes nuzen: Aufklrung, Bildung, Kenntnisse, Kunst und Wissenschaft, alles, was uns Klarheit verschafft, zu verstehen, was uns umgibt, und alles, worin unsere Persnlichkeit, unser Bestand besteht. Ich fr meinen Teil habe das Gefhl, da diese Dinge nicht anders als durch die Leidenschaften gefragt werden knnen, ja da die Einsicht nicht mehr als die Strke eines Menschen bedeutet, da seine Begierden und Talente sein Talent sind, seine Erkenntnis aber sein Vermgen. Ich meine nicht das Erwarten, Wnschen, Hoffen, das Verlangen nach dem Guten oder Schlimmen, das Empfinden der Freude und des Lems, sondern die groen und starken Leidenschaften, wie Zorn, Liebe, Hoffnung, Mut, Anmut, Bescheidenheit, Stolz, Besessenheit, Eifersucht, Neid, Hartherzigkeit, Reue usw., kurz, alles, was einen Menschen triebhaft macht, so da er sich in seinen Strebungen verliert, mit sich selbst kmpft, das Unglck sucht und um das Glck ringt. 64 64 "Certainly. And, as we were saying, the united influence of music and gymnasticwill bring them into accord, nerving and sustaining the reason withnoble words and lessons, and moderating and soothing and civilizingthe wildness of passion by harmony and rhythm? Quite true, he said. And these two, thus nurtured and educated, and having learned trulyto know their own functions, will rule over the concupiscent, whichin each of us is the largest part of the soul and by nature most insatiableof gain; over this they will keep guard, lest, waxing great and strongwith the fulness of bodily pleasures, as they are termed, the concupiscentsoul, no longer confined to her own sphere, should attempt to enslaveand rule those who are not her natural-born subjects, and overturnthe whole life of man? Very true, he said. Both together will they not be the best defenders of the whole souland the whole body against attacks from without; the one counselling,and the other fighting under his leader, and courageously executinghis commands and counsels? @@ -1592,14 +1592,14 @@ Exactly so. Are you satisfied then that the quality which makes such men and suc Not I, indeed. Then our dream has been realised; and the suspicion which we entertainedat the beginning of our work of construction, that some divine powermust have conducted us to a primary form of justice, has now beenverified? Yes, certainly. And the division of labour which required the carpenter and the shoemakerand the rest of the citizens to be doing each his own business, andnot another's, was a shadow of justice, and for that reason it wasof use?" "Summary: The text discusses the relationship between music, gymnastics, and the soul, emphasizing the importance of balance and harmony in human nature. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialogue between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy -Active character: The speaker and his interlocutor" "There is a strong musical element in gymnastics, and a strong gymnastic element in music. The former develops the body; the latter develops the soul. The two together make the perfect man."""" Well,"" said the other, ""if I were you I should have stopped there and left it at that. But why bring in the idea of the soul?"""" Because,"" replied his companion, ""in order to be sure of having the balance right between the two elements, it is necessary that the soul shall take the lead, and see that the body does not get away from her. There are men who give themselves up entirely to physical culture, and thus make themselves mere machines. If you will look about you among the young men of your acquaintance you will find some who are like this. They go in for swimming, and rowing, and walking, and fencing, and riding, and boxing, and they become as hard as nails, but they have no souls. Others neglect gymnastics altogether and study only their souls. You may find them reading poetry, or studying philosophy, or writing novels, or going in for art. In all these ways they try to live in the region of ideas. They forget, however, that their bodies must be exercised as well as their minds. " +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: The speaker and his interlocutor" "Eines Tages erzhlte ich ihm, da der Mensch ein Instrument sei und die Musik sein Blser. Er nickte nachdenklich und meinte: """"In der Tat! Wenn man den Menschen ausser Atem setzt und ihn mit Gymnastik anfhrt, so ist das wie eine Walkyre, die einen Saiteninstrument-Bauernhof in Ordnung bringt."""" Mir war nicht wohl zumute. Ich frchtete, er habe sich im Alkohol verstrickt. Man hat oft Lust, etwas zu sagen, das man eigentlich gar nicht meint. Aber was ich htte sagen knnen, wenn ich mir im Grunde meine eigenen Gedanken vllig ehrlich eingesprungen htte? Mein Freund hatte recht. Der Mensch ist ein Instrument. Und was die Musik betrifft, so ist sie nichts als der Daseinssinn des Lebens. Niemals kann man sie verstehen, wenn man nicht selbst von ihr berwltigt wird. Es geht das Gerchl umher, die Musik sei ein Vergngen der Sinne und der Leidenschaften. Das stimmt nicht. Sie ergreift uns, weil wir keine Sinne mehr haben, die wir unterdrcken knnten. Die Musik, sagt Nietzsche, sei eine Stimmung. In Wirklichkeit ist sie viel mehr noch: sie ist der Grundstimmung. Was wir Stimmung nennen, ist blo ein besonderer Fall der musikalischen Empfindung. Wer jemals auf dem Rckweg von einer Kirchenmusik oder einem Konzert merkt, da er nicht heim will, sondern nur noch ein paar Stunden lnger bleiben mchte, der wei, wovon ich rede. Man hat niemals genug von der Musik. Wie soll es aber kommen, da wir in diesem neuen Kriege immer wieder auf die Nerven kommen, obwohl alles so schn und fest bereitet ist? Weil unsere Seele ganz falsch eingerichtet ist. Sie will nicht in den allgemeinen Formen unserer Zeit leben. Wir sind noch barbarisch, aber wir wollen schon zivilisiert sein. Deshalb gibt es keinen Frieden. Jeder verwirrt sich, jeder wird rasend, und diejenigen, die am besten verstanden haben, warum sie rasend werden, sind die blutigsten. Sie glauben nicht daran, da sie mit Gewalt durchsetzen knnen, was sie wollen, also machen sie es so: Sie setzen ihre Willenskraft in Kraft, ohne sich um ihren Willen zu kmmern. Sie zerren an der Mauer, nicht weil sie sie abbrechen wollen, sondern um sich zu verteidigen. Dafr steht ihnen der Rest der Welt gegenber, der die Mauer mssen lassen will. So bekommt man zwei furchtbare Krper, beide angestrengt, beide erregt. Eine starke Seele ist eine kluge Seele. Wir sind schwach und leicht zu reizen. Wir leiden unter dem physischen Stress, dem wir gegenber stehen, und der Stress macht uns rasend. Wir mssen uns doch in diesem neuen Kriege zusammennehmen! Wir mssen unseren Geist auf unsern Korper legen, um das Gleichgewicht herzustellen! Wir haben die Kunst, die Natur und die Geschichte unter einen Hut gebracht. Warum bringen wir dann nicht auch unsre seelische Seite hinein? Warum wollen wir nicht auch die Harmonie zwischen der Seele und dem Korper herstellen? Der Mensch ist der einzige lebende Organismus, dem die Seele fehlt. Die anderen Tiere haben sie, aber nicht so stark wie wir. Das kommt daher, da sie kein Gefhl fr die Zeit haben. " 65 65 "Clearly. But in reality justice was such as we were describing, being concernedhowever, not with the outward man, but with the inward, which is thetrue self and concernment of man: for the just man does not permitthe several elements within him to interfere with one another, orany of them to do the work of others, --he sets in order his own innerlife, and is his own master and his own law, and at peace with himself;and when he has bound together the three principles within him, whichmay be compared to the higher, lower, and middle notes of the scale,and the intermediate intervals --when he has bound all these together,and is no longer many, but has become one entirely temperate and perfectlyadjusted nature, then he proceeds to act, if he has to act, whetherin a matter of property, or in the treatment of the body, or in someaffair of politics or private business; always thinking and callingthat which preserves and co-operates with this harmonious condition,just and good action, and the knowledge which presides over it, wisdom,and that which at any time impairs this condition, he will call unjustaction, and the opinion which presides over it ignorance. You have said the exact truth, Socrates. Very good; and if we were to affirm that we had discovered the justman and the just State, and the nature of justice in each of them,we should not be telling a falsehood? Most certainly not. May we say so, then? Let us say so. And now, I said, injustice has to be considered. Clearly. Must not injustice be a strife which arises among the three principles--a meddlesomeness, and interference, and rising up of a part of thesoul against the whole, an assertion of unlawful authority, whichis made by a rebellious subject against a true prince, of whom heis the natural vassal, --what is all this confusion and delusion butinjustice, and intemperance and cowardice and ignorance, and everyform of vice? @@ -1618,17 +1618,17 @@ Certainly not, he replied. Come up hither, I said, and behold the various forms I am following you, he replied: proceed. I said, The argument seems to have reached a height from which, asfrom some tower of speculation, a man may look down and see that virtueis one, but that the forms of vice are innumerable; there being fourspecial ones which are deserving of note." "Summary: The text discusses the concepts of justice, injustice, and virtue through a conversation between two characters. Trope: The contrast between good and evil Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, interlocutor -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s Fuzzy place: Unnamed location -Diegetic time: A few minutes" The truth is, that we must not only know the right, but we must also be just and good. For the righteous alone, and he who has a mind which is perfect in justice, rightly uses his own and the public possessions ; but the unjust man, though he may have acquired much knowledge, is ignorant of the use of goods. Socrates. No one, I say, can have justice without having virtue in general; for it is impossible that he should be just who is intemperate and violent, or unjust who is temperate and gentle. But this is true of all the virtues ; each being distinct, yet mutually dependent on one another. Interlocutor. What you say is very true, but we were speaking of what is just in itself, and of injustice, as if they were something apart from other virtues and vices. Tell us then whether justice is something distinct from all other virtues, or rather a portion of them ? Do you think, for example, that a man would be just if he were, as the saying is, a coward in war? Or if he was always breaking into houses, and stealing everything that he could lay his hands on, would he be thought to possess justice ? Or again, suppose that he had no self-command, and did not abstain from pleasures, and took pleasure in doing anything that came uppermost, would he be just ? Socrates. Certainly not, Gorgias, said I. Interlocutor. And yet these are the qualities which men generally attribute to him whose praises they are singing. For when they call any one a bold man, they mean to imply that he is fearless in war ; and the word bold (in Greek, eiroiKos) is derived from eiro, war. Again, when they call him a strong man, they mean to imply that he is a thief, and can take what belongs to others without scruple ; and the word strong (in Greek, Bxyeos) is derived from byo, property. And when they call him a manly man, they mean to imply that he is a drunkard, and takes pleasure in drinking and in doing all sorts of things which other people hate ; and the word manly (in Greek, aner) is derived from neros, a thing which is dried up. Now justice, as I was saying and am still of opinion, is not any of these, but is quite the opposite of them ; for instead of being a coward in war, she is brave ; instead of being a thief, she promotes harmony and concord ; and instead of being a drunkard, she teaches temperance and self-control. Socrates. Thou art quite right, Callicles, in saying that justice is of this sort ; and I am delighted to find that you agree with me ; for you certainly speak as if you were inspired, and as if justice were of all possessions the greatest, fair to behold, and carrying victory in her train. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "Ngaunye, kalo ka angkot sa balay n~g Sinamanagpangulngulan? N~gausap ka ba kan~g mag ulo? Kay sa imong pagsilang? Kay sa imong panahon sa dun~ga? Kay sa imong matuod nga gipakalabngan? Sa pagkaon nga wal n~g kahoy? Sa pagkaon nga wal n~g tinapay? Sa pagkamad niining mga pilay? Sa pagtuman~gon mo'ng ma'y halos wal n~g sinumpa? Sino ang mahimutang makasubo n~g kalipay sa inyong huna-hunaan? Ikaw man! Kung wala man ka'y isigkatawohan. Sino? Ang tanang pilay dito sa lansangan? Oh! ayuhin ko sila. Ayuhin mo! ang taga-pugngan kan~g bulok nga pilay na! Oh! ayuhin mo sila. Usapan nato niining libo ka tawo. Sila'y mga pilay; usapan nato us ka pilay: kaniya us ka pilay; us naman us ka pilay. Makaingat kang magsukol: wala'y bag-ong pilay dili ang iyaha. Maayo ka'y may kasikan. Puslaka! Paano ang kahibalo sa iya? Sa buhat! ang ikapitls n~g kainitan. Ayan, sama ka! Dili ka makasalmatan! Oh! salamatn ko ka gayud! Maoy pangkatinod nga sugdan sa kaniya. N~gasulti ka ug sulti nga sulit-sulti. Wal n~g lin~go-an. Bati't higayon ka didto, kay masama ka ug ma'ya sa tawo. Mao nay daog-dao ana ug sultihon. Diin miwala ang ginagmay n~g iya'y? Uwah! duh? Yana si Socrates, ilabi na sa Sugbo ug unya sa Cebu: yan siya'y nanagbantay n~g mga pilay nga iya malubngon! Ania ang iya'y kabtng? Kadto. Kadto kaya'y busa. Sino ang ma'y diin kamtanan ang pagtuman~gon? Siya man! ang Socrates! Ah! ma, it's a pity that you are not as clever as he is!"""" As the interlocutor was speaking, Socrates kept on examining him with his piercing eyes. " 66 66 "What do you mean? he said. I mean, I replied, that there appear to be as many forms of the soulas there are distinct forms of the State. How many? There are five of the State, and five of the soul, I said. What are they? The first, I said, is that which we have been describing, and whichmay be said to have two names, monarchy and aristocracy, accordinglyas rule is exercised by one distinguished man or by many. @@ -1646,17 +1646,17 @@ Socrates - ADEIMANTUS - GLAUCON - THRASYMACHUS And without more ado, said Thrasymachus, you may consider us all tobe equally agreed. I said, You know not what you are doing in thus assailing me: Whatan argument are you raising about the State! Just as I thought thatI had finished, and was only too glad that I had laid this questionto sleep, and was reflecting how fortunate I was in your acceptanceof what I then said, you ask me to begin again at the very foundation,ignorant of what a hornet's nest of words you are stirring. Now Iforesaw this gathering trouble, and avoided it. For what purpose do you conceive that we have come here, said Thrasymachus,--to look for gold, or to hear discourse?" "Summary: The speaker discusses the different forms of the soul and the State, while being interrupted by another character who suggests letting the speaker off. The conversation then shifts to discussing the family life and community of women and children. -Enunciation: Dialogue -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonism +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, Glaucon, Adeimantus Quoted character: Pole marchus -Time setting: Contemporary -Diegetic time: A few minutes" There is no soul without a head, even in the State; and this is the reason why Pericles, Son of Xanthippus, who was the head among the Athenians, kept that great body of men in order when they were well off, and even when they fell into poverty he pulled them out again, and at length induced them to go to war. But after his death, while their head was cut off, their misfortunes began; they fell into the hands of Cleon, who made the fortune of the Spartans; for instead of setting the body of his countrymen free, he betook himself to the most savage measure of all, and bit off the legs of others, until he had devoured all the flesh upon his own bones. And now he is dead and buried, do you suppose that there will be less fighting or fewer wars? Far otherwise. For the heads which have succeeded, and will succeed him, will be utterly incapable of managing their affairs either with moderation or good sense; but old Cleon will be like one of those maniacal heroes in tragedy who sit still and utter words, but don't move their limbs, and therefore can neither tie their own shoestrings nor help themselves in any other way. And so perhaps people may say in Athens, 'Cleon is dead, yet the fury of war increases.' Yes, Glaucon, and the evil will grow till some one pulls seven times 7 the head off again; and then the rest of the body will be much eased. Now what I should like to know is whether you would agree with me in saying that this fiction of mine is an likely than the truth? Or do you prefer what we were just now saying? Nay, by heaven! I might almost express my serious opinion as I did this frivolous tale which last we told about sacrifices and images, making use of sacred forms of speech, and saying that if there were such a thing as life after death, and if our sovereign leaders, who are good men, made discoveries about it, then these would be revealed to us by God at through dreams. As the prophet Aesop, who was a wise man, said of a statue which he had reared at Delphi, 'For if he speaks not to you, keep silent,' thinking that if he did speak he would speak the truth. Why, yes, we should surely be quite satisfied, Socrates, if something of the sort were to happen to us. And indeed if I am not mistaken we have heard from you already that the souls of the dead do appear in our sleep. And further, speaking of things in heaven, you said that the unchangeable has revealed itself to you. Now, if the changeless may be said to have revealed itself, the next thing would surely be that it has also spoken, for if it had not spoken, we should never have known of its existence. +Time setting: 1950s +Diegetic time: A few minutes" There are three of them. And the same applies to the soul, for in each of us there are these three principles, one with a golden nature and another with a silver, and the third with a brazen or an iron nature. The best soul is ruled by the divine part, which is also the smallest; the second best by the spirited part; and the worst by the largest part of it, the appetites. And when they quarrel with one another, then the whole city is in turmoil.” “What you say,” Glaucon said, “is not very reassuring. But I gather that you are now going to tell us what sort of State we ought to aim at establishing?” “Wait a little,” Socrates said. “You must not expect me to have all the answers ready. It will take some time before we shall see clearly enough to be able to answer your question. Meanwhile, since we have wandered so far from our starting point, perhaps we had better try to find it again. In other words, let us consider what kind of men the rulers of our State should be. Do you think it would be possible to discover them if we assumed that they were as young as possible? Would not this be better than assuming that they are as old as possible?” “How could that possibly help us?” Glaucon asked. “Why, my dear Glaucon,” Socrates replied, “because if the rulers are to be as young as possible, they will need only a small piece of gold to carry out their work, whereas if they are to be as old as possible, they will need a large quantity.” Adeimantus broke in here: “I don’t understand what you mean. You seem to be talking about a puppet show rather than a serious discussion. Perhaps Polemarchus will explain it to me.” He turned to Polemarchus. “What’s all this nonsense about puppets?” he asked. “Socrates was talking about a state,” Polemarchus explained. “But now he seems to want to talk about marionettes.” “Not at all,” Socrates said. “The two things are closely connected. You must remember that every State contains many elements, but only one of these can rule, while the rest must be content to obey. Now when we look at the different elements in a State, some of them are like puppets with gold strings, others with silver strings, and others with brass strings. And the strings must be attached to the heads of the rulers, who have to make the puppets dance. If they are young and strong, and the strings are attached to them while they are still children, the puppets will dance lightly, because the strings will be short; but if they become old and weak, they will have to bend down or even get down on all fours in order to make the puppets dance. 67 67 "Yes, but discourse should have a limit. Yes, Socrates, said Glaucon, and the whole of life is the only limitwhich wise men assign to the hearing of such discourses. But nevermind about us; take heart yourself and answer the question in yourown way: What sort of community of women and children is this whichis to prevail among our guardians? and how shall we manage the periodbetween birth and education, which seems to require the greatest care?Tell us how these things will be. Yes, my simple friend, but the answer is the reverse of easy; manymore doubts arise about this than about our previous conclusions.For the practicability of what is said may be doubted; and lookedat in another point of view, whether the scheme, if ever so practicable,would be for the best, is also doubtful. Hence I feel a reluctanceto approach the subject, lest our aspiration, my dear friend, shouldturn out to be a dream only. Fear not, he replied, for your audience will not be hard upon you;they are not sceptical or hostile. @@ -1674,15 +1674,15 @@ You cannot. Then, if women are to have the same duties as men, they must havethe Yes. The education which was assigned to the men was music and gymnastic.Yes. Then women must be taught music and gymnastic and also the art ofwar, which they must practise like the men?" "Summary: The speaker discusses the topic of women and children in a community and their roles in society. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters, Socrates and Glaucon -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, Glaucon -Time setting: Contemporary" "There ain't no place in a community for women and kids. You can't afford 'em. If you want to be hardboiled, you just have to skip the girls and the kids; they soften you up too much."""" Isn't that a queer way of looking at it?"" Glaucon demanded. """"It isn't my way of looking at it at all,"""" Socrates replied frankly. """"I'm just telling you how it looks to some people. I know you're going to tell me that those are just the people who ought to be skipped themselves. Well, maybe so; but that's not what we're talking about now."""" Do you believe there really are such people as you describe, men who aren't afraid of women or children?"""" Oh yes, lots of them,"" said Socrates. ""I met one last night myself."" He sighed. """"And he wasn't half bad either!"""" What do you mean?"" I mean he was quite an interesting chap in a lot of ways. But he couldn't even tell me where he was born, or where he had lived before that. And yet he claimed to know more than I did about a lot of things. It's awful to think we live in a world with men like that around. But I suppose they always have been around, and always will be. That's what makes it so difficult to keep alive the good old simple faith. There's no sense in deceiving ourselves. We've got to face facts."""" Don't you think that man was putting on an act?"" Not a bit of it,"" Socrates answered positively. ""He was just plain raw."""" Glaucon gazed at him steadily through his horn-rimmed spectacles. """"What is this rawness?"""" he asked. """"I don't seem to understand you."""" Raw means uncooked, rough, crude, uncouth, vulgar, primitive,"" Socrates explained. ""He was all of those things. I wish I'd never come out here, because now I'll have to go right back and tell Hemlock about it. It's no use keeping secrets from him any longer. I suppose he'll be furious."""" Are you sure you saw what you thought you saw?"" Glaucon asked. """"Can you be absolutely certain?"""" No, I can't,"" Socrates confessed, ""but I'm pretty sure."" Then let's wait until tomorrow,"" Glaucon suggested. ""If he turns out to be what you suspect, we can take action then. But if we act too hastily, it may spoil everything."""" Oh, I see!"" said Socrates. ""That's very wise. Thank you, Glaucon! You're a real help to me when I need one. I'll remember that tomorrow, and not rush into anything without consulting you first."""" And after that, the two friends sat by the fire without speaking for a long time. At length Socrates drew a deep breath. """"Glaucon,"""" he exclaimed, """"do you know what I've been thinking about all this while?"""" " +Time setting: 1950s" The talk had turned to the topic of women and children in a community, and how they should be treated. Socrates was speaking. ‘My dear Glaucon,’ he said, ‘we must keep them out of sight of the rest of us, until we have arranged for the breeding of our young.’ ‘Why?’ ‘Because if we let them grow up with us, they will get into all sorts of mischief. They will become lazy and idle, and they’ll spoil our work. I tell you, Glaucon, it’s better to treat them like animals, and keep them separate from us. That way, they can be useful to us when they are needed; but they won’t interfere with our plans for perfecting the State.’ Glaucon nodded his head in agreement. He was just about to open his mouth and say something more, when there was an urgent knocking at the door. The two men looked at each other. ‘Who is it?’ asked Socrates. ‘It’s Mike,’ said the voice from outside. ‘Mike? What do you want?’ Mike opened the door and came in. He looked scared. ‘It’s the wife,’ he said. ‘What about her?’ ‘She’s gone.’ ‘Gone? Where to?’ ‘I don’t know. She packed a bag and said she was going to visit her mother. I tried to stop her, but she wouldn’t listen.’ Socrates sighed. ‘Well,’ he said, ‘that’s that, then. We’d better go and find her.’ Mike nodded. ‘You take care of things here, Glaucon,’ said Socrates. ‘We’ll go and see what’s up.’ * * * * * * They found Mrs. Smith sitting on the bed in their hotel room. She was crying quietly to herself. She stopped when they came in. ‘What’s the matter?’ said Socrates. ‘Why are you crying?’ ‘I’ve changed my mind,’ sobbed Mrs. Smith. ‘I don’t want to leave you after all.’ Socrates sat down on the edge of the bed and put his arm around her shoulders. ‘Don’t worry,’ he said. ‘Everything will be all right. Why did you change your mind?’ ‘I thought about it,’ said Mrs. Smith. ‘And I realized that this wasn’t a good place for me. I’m not cut out for a life of crime. I want to go back to my husband and my little boy. I want to live a quiet life, and bring them up properly.’ Socrates smiled. ‘That’s fine,’ he said. ‘I’m glad you’ve seen sense. But where do you think you’re going to find them now? You told me you didn’t know where they were.’ ‘Yes,’ said Mrs. Smith, ‘but I know where they used to live. And I’m sure they’ll still be there. My husband’s a very loyal man. He’s not the kind to run off and leave his family. He’ll still be living in the same house, waiting for me to come back. 68 68 "That is the inference, I suppose. I should rather expect, I said, that several of our proposals, ifthey are carried out, being unusual, may appear ridiculous. No doubt of it. Yes, and the most ridiculous thing of all will be the sight of womennaked in the palaestra, exercising with the men, especially when theyare no longer young; they certainly will not be a vision of beauty,any more than the enthusiastic old men who in spite of wrinkles andugliness continue to frequent the gymnasia. Yes, indeed, he said: according to present notions the proposal wouldbe thought ridiculous. @@ -1697,17 +1697,17 @@ These are the objections, Glaucon, and there are many others of alike kind, whic By Zeus, he said, the problem to be solved is anything but easy. Why yes, I said, but the fact is that when a man is out of his depth,whether he has fallen into a little swimming bath or into mid-ocean,he has to swim all the same. Very true. And must not we swim and try to reach the shore: we will hope thatArion's dolphin or some other miraculous help may save us?" "Summary: The text discusses the proposal of women participating in activities usually reserved for men, such as exercising and wearing armor. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonism +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, Glaucon -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" You would be very much surprised, Mr. Socrates, to see the way in which women take to this sort of thing when they get a chance. They are born for it, and also, I may add, for managing a house-hold, if you know what that means.” “And do you think that they can do both?” “I have no difficulty in believing that.” “Then let us suppose that the women accept our proposal, and that we now consider in what way they are to be employed.” “Why not leave them to do just what they like? They will go where they are pleased to go, and will beg, or steal, or do anything else, if they get an opportunity; and the whole State is thereby distracted.” “Yes, but what good will that do?” “You would have done better, Glaucon, to observe whether what they like doing is good for them to do, and whether the result of their doing it is good for the State; for in that case their pleasure and advantage would be the same as the pleasure and advantage of the State.” “Very true,” he replied; “and I quite recognize the justice of your criticism. But let us consult about the proposal of which we were speaking, and say whether these women whom we have now introduced—what business shall we assign to them?” “They will provide things necessary for the life of man.” “Such as clothing and food and medical attendance?” “Certainly.” “And there is one branch of medicine, as you may remembrance, which is concerned with the generation of children?” “Yes, sexual propagation.” “Now is there any use to which we shall put these guardians or soldiers?” “What use but to command and to be commanded?” “And would not this be natural enough? The men having exercise in war, and likewise in peacetime in the pursuit of military gymnastics, while the women, being freed from all such occupations, and having their bodies and limbs duly attuned, may with propriety be employed in the pursuits of peace.” “I agree with you, and hope that you will proceed accordingly.” “Then what we want under the influence of war is that the women should stay at home and spin bravely at the loom, or mingle with the children; the men, on the other hand, will have to fight.” “Undoubtedly.” “Then is there not another kind of warfare which they will have to carry on against each other?” “What do you mean?” “We may assume that some of them will be plants, and others brute beasts?” “True.” “Then will not the husbandmen require wives who will help them in tilling the ground?” “To be sure.” “And in war will not brave men need wives who will aid and share danger and who, as has been already admitted, will be mothers and grandmothers of their children?” “Certainly, and this will clearly be the best and most lawful arrangement for those who are really to be the mothers and guardians of our future generations, and who will be themselves free from all worldly cares.” “Then now, Glaucon, after considering all the different natures of which mankind is composed, we shall be able to produce a constitution which is composed according to nature, and therefore constitutes the greatest happiness. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "There was something about the way he said it that made me realize he meant it. I could see him in his mind's eye, like some Greek hero of old, exercising with sword and shield, wearing armor, growing big and strong and red-blooded. It was a terrific vision. And then I saw it all come crashing down around his ears. Women in exercise suits on the beach! Women at the gym! Women in bathing caps playing golf! Women wearing armor! It sounded like a Hitchcock movie. Well, I'll be damned,"" he said when he got through laughing. ""I guess you're right."""" The doorbell rang. Glaucon groaned. Socrates opened the door. A woman stood there in a pink sweater and blue slacks. She was middle-aged and had her hair done up in a bun. Her face was round and pudgy, her lips were painted bright red, and she was smiling. Hello, Mrs. Leshner,"" Socrates said. ""What can I do for you?"" I'm looking for my husband."" He isn't here, Mrs. Leshner."" I know, but maybe he's coming back soon. Maybe he left word where he was going."""" No, he didn't. In fact, he hasn't been home all day."" Then why don't you tell me where he is?"""" Because I don't know. That's the truth. I haven't seen him since last night."""" Is that so?"" She stared at him suspiciously. ""You ain't kidding me, are you? You wouldn't kid me, would you?"""" Yes, I would,"" he told her. ""But I'm not today."""" She looked him over carefully from head to foot. Satisfied, she smiled again. """"Well, maybe he went fishing. Or maybe he's off visiting somebody. He don't tell me everything he does."""" I don't think he's fishing,"" Socrates said. ""He took his suitcase with him."""" Oh yeah? When'd you see that?"" Just before he left."" Well, what am I supposed to think? What am I supposed to do now?"""" Well, you might call the police,"" Socrates suggested. She shook her head. ""No, they won't help me none. They never do. You want to go have lunch, honey?"""" Lunch? Why should we go have lunch? We've already eaten."" Yeah, but maybe we could eat again."" I'm full,"" he said. ""Why don't you go ask your daughter-in-law?"""" Her eyes grew cold and hard. You ain't being very friendly,"" she said. ""Maybe you ain't as nice as I thought you was. I don't think I care much for you, mister. I think maybe you better watch yourself."""" I'm watching myself,"" he told her. ""Now please go away."""" She turned and walked heavily out the door. As it closed behind her, Socrates leaned against the wall and sighed. " 69 69 "I suppose so, he said. Well then, let us see if any way of escape can be found. We acknowledged--did we not? that different natures ought to have different pursuits,and that men's and women's natures are different. And now what arewe saying? --that different natures ought to have the same pursuits,--this is the inconsistency which is charged upon us. Precisely. Verily, Glaucon, I said, glorious is the power of the art of contradiction! Why do you say so? Because I think that many a man falls into the practice against hiswill. When he thinks that he is reasoning he is really disputing,just because he cannot define and divide, and so know that of whichhe is speaking; and he will pursue a merely verbal opposition in thespirit of contention and not of fair discussion. @@ -1722,16 +1722,16 @@ Very true, he said. Next, we shall ask our opponent how, in reference to any of That will be quite fair. And perhaps he, like yourself, will reply that to give a sufficientanswer on the instant is not easy; but after a little reflection thereis no difficulty. Yes, perhaps. Suppose then that we invite him to accompany us in the argument, andthen we may hope to show him that there is nothing peculiar in theconstitution of women which would affect them in the administrationof the State. By all means. Let us say to him: Come now, and we will ask you a question: --whenyou spoke of a nature gifted or not gifted in any respect, did youmean to say that one man will acquire a thing easily, another withdifficulty; a little learning will lead the one to discover a greatdeal; whereas the other, after much study and application, no soonerlearns than he forgets; or again, did you mean, that the one has abody which is a good servant to his mind, while the body of the otheris a hindrance to him?-would not these be the sort of differenceswhich distinguish the man gifted by nature from the one who is ungifted?" "Summary: The text discusses the concept of different natures having different pursuits and explores the nature of women's roles in society. -Enunciation: Dialogue -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation Active character: Glaucon, Socrates -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "Glaucon, who had listened to these words with an air of the greatest astonishment and perplexity, now said in his turn, 'My dear friend, do you really imagine that there is any sense in which a woman would not be more rightly called a man than a man a woman?"""" Oh yes,"" said Socrates, ""I certainly do. And if you will take the other way of answering my question, you will find me still more convinced."""" But what shall I say, then?"" said Glaucon. Shall I say that a woman has a man's nature, and therefore ought to have a man's pursuits? Or that she has a woman's nature, and ought not to have them?"""" Both,"" said Socrates; ""but when they conflict, and are difficult to reconcile, it is better to follow the woman's nature than the man's."" Then,"" said Glaucon, ""I suppose that you mean to say that a woman ought not to be a warrior, but ought to stay at home and spin."" By Zeus,"" said Socrates, ""I can't help thinking that she ought to spin; but that is only because I am not clever enough to find some other employment for her."" As far as I am concerned,"" said Glaucon, ""if I were founding a city I should make women spin, and go through all sorts of menial work, just like their mothers and grandmothers."""" And yet,"" said Socrates, ""in your own country you will find no less than three goddesses spinning."""" Pallas Athena,"" said Glaucon; ""and Minerva was the daughter of Jupiter, and Jupiter made her to spin the web of destiny."""" That is true,"" said Socrates; ""but you will also find Venus spinning the web of love."""" Ah!"" said Glaucon, ""that is only a fable."" Yes, my good friend,"" said Socrates; ""but I cannot help fancying that this story of the battle of the gods and giants has a meaning which is rather too profound for me; and that it means that the human race must be always undergoing some change for the worse, and is always being improved by some divinity or other. For the gods, as they are better than men, must always be making things better for them; and the gods are immortal, and so are their works. Do you think that I am right?"""" Not at all,"" said Glaucon. And I am sure that I am not,"" replied Socrates. ""But let us return to our subject: tell me, do you think that the education of a woman should be the same as that of a man?"""" Certainly not,"" he said. Why not?"" said Socrates. Because they are different beings."" I mean,"" said Socrates, ""that they ought both to have the same pursuit."" How absurd!"" said Glaucon. " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "There was a touch of harshness in his tone, and the vivid light in his eyes seemed to come from some inner flame. Glaucon shivered slightly as he answered: """"I take it that you are referring to those different natures which have been allotted different pursuits by their respective stars?"""" He's not far wrong,"" Socrates replied. ""You seem to be one of those who are born for war and politics. You've got your work cut out for you when you grow up, Glaucon."""" Yes, sir."" Glaucon was very much impressed by this confirmation of his own high opinion of himself. If Plato had been there, I don't suppose he would have allowed him to get away with that one; but I'm not Plato. I'm only old Samson, the teacher of rhetoric. Let him enjoy himself while he's young and I'll give him a lesson or two later on. Now then, what were you saying about women's nature?"" Only that we naturally follow our men about like shadows wherever they go and do whatever they tell us."" Yes; but why is it that all through the ages you have been so entirely subordinate to them?"""" Well, sir, it seems to me that you could hardly expect men to let us do anything else. We're weaker than they are, so we must obey them and do whatever they tell us to do."""" That sounds reasonable enough. But it doesn't account for everything, does it? Women rule the roost in some countries, particularly in China. It seems odd that a nation of rational people should submit to being ruled by women."""" Oh, I don't know, sir,"" said Glaucon. ""It's probably because they're cleverer than the Chinese men. They certainly are here."""" They may be,"" said Socrates. ""But wouldn't it be more reasonable to suppose that the Chinese men are too weak to rule themselves?"""" I hadn't thought of that, sir. Yes, it might be something like that."""" And even in England,"" Socrates continued, ""the women seem to be taking over every time. The suffragettes won a great victory some years ago, and they're winning another now."""" What sort of a victory?"" I mean that nowadays women are allowed to drive cars, and they're actually going to be allowed to smoke cigarettes. Don't you think that's rather dreadful?"""" Of course it is, sir. I can't imagine anything worse. It's just like the way things are going in America at present. We shall soon be letting women do anything they like, and where will it end?"""" That's what I want to find out,"" said Socrates. ""Is there any reason why they shouldn't do anything they like? Why should they be forbidden to become doctors, lawyers, politicians, clergymen, soldiers, or even policemen?"""" Oh, no, sir. I didn't mean that. " 70 70 "No one will deny that. And can you mention any pursuit of mankind in which the male sex hasnot all these gifts and qualities in a higher degree than the female?Need I waste time in speaking of the art of weaving, and the managementof pancakes and preserves, in which womankind does really appear tobe great, and in which for her to be beaten by a man is of all thingsthe most absurd? You are quite right, he replied, in maintaining the general inferiorityof the female sex: although many women are in many things superiorto many men, yet on the whole what you say is true. And if so, my friend, I said, there is no special faculty of administrationin a state which a woman has because she is a woman, or which a manhas by virtue of his sex, but the gifts of nature are alike diffusedin both; all the pursuits of men are the pursuits of women also, butin all of them a woman is inferior to a man. @@ -1754,14 +1754,14 @@ By far the best. And will not their wives be the best women? Yes, by far the bes There can be nothing better. And this is what the arts of music and gymnastic, when present insuch manner as we have described, will accomplish? Certainly. Then we have made an enactment not only possible but in the highestdegree beneficial to the State? True. Then let the wives of our guardians strip, for their virtue will betheir robe, and let them share in the toils of war and the defenceof their country; only in the distribution of labours the lighterare to be assigned to the women, who are the weaker natures, but inother respects their duties are to be the same. And as for the manwho laughs at naked women exercising their bodies from the best ofmotives, in his laughter he is plucking" "Summary: The text discusses the natural differences between men and women and argues that women should be allowed to participate in certain pursuits, such as weaving and music, that are traditionally reserved for men. -Enunciation: Dialogue -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Enlightenment -Active character: Men, Women" "Men are made for the chase, and women for the loom: but if you take a woman's arm, she can shoot as straight as a man; and I have known some women who could ride like men. But then, what of that? It was a woman who taught me to ride; and, now that I think of it, I remember her well, for she was a right good-looking creature, though by no means as handsome as my old nurse."""" The men stared at each other, and one of them said: """"By the gods! Are there such things in the world?"""" To be sure there are,"" answered the other. ""And why not? A woman's body is just as strong as a man's, and many of them are much better formed. A woman's work is generally lighter than a man's, so that they grow up more supple and quick, and able to do anything that comes handy. No doubt the great mother-goddess of the Pelasgians knew what she was about when she made men for the chase and women for the loom. She meant that men should hunt wild beasts, while women hunted birds and fishes, and caught them with nets. Why, I've seen many a woman who could catch a trout or a salmon almost as well as a man, and kill it with a twist of her fingers, without the help of knife or hook. " +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: Men, Women" "You ain't so bright yourself, I guess. You think the men in this world is made just like the women? No. We're made different."""" The natural differences between men and women,"" said Mr. Spassova flatly. """"Yes,"""" she repeated, """"but you don't know what I mean."""" Men's got a lot more sense than women,"" he said. ""There ain't no use talking about it. There ain't nothing you can do that we can't do better. That's why we let you do the weaving and the cooking and the music."""" The music?"" She looked at him. ""What did you say about the music?"""" Well, you sing a lot, don't you? And we got the instruments."""" You can't play!"" she said. He shook his head. ""No."" Why not?"" he asked. ""I told you we ain't got any sense. That's why we make you do all the work."""" But it isn't true,"" she protested. ""We don't have to do all the work."""" Yes, you do,"" he insisted. ""All of it. Everything except the fighting."""" But men fight all the time,"" she pointed out. ""They kill each other. They've been doing it for centuries."""" It's the same thing,"" he said. ""It's the only thing we're good for. Killing each other."""" Aren't you ever going to stop?"" Of course not. We need something to do."""" Then why don't you let us have some of your games?"" If we did, we'd have nothing left to do."" But you have plenty of games."" Not enough."" Then why don't you invent more?"" I'm trying to,"" he said, ""but it's hard. We need more materials."""" She turned away from him and started walking across the room. What are you doing?"" he asked. I'm leaving."" Why?"" I want to go back to my house."" He followed her. ""Why don't you stay here with me?"" I told you before. I don't want to live here."" Well, you're going to."" How do you know?"" Because you aren't going to leave,"" he said. ""And neither am I."""" But I want to!"" But you're not going to,"" he said. ""You're going to stay right here with me."""" Why?"" he asked, ""and you tell me why. Why?"""" Well, because you want to!"" Why? Tell me why."" I just do! I just feel like it!"" That ain't a reason,"" he said. ""That ain't no reason at all!"""" He pulled her around to face him. """"Now look here,"""" he said, """"we got to be reasonable. You're going to stay here because you can't go anywhere else. You understand?"""" I don't care!"" " 71 71 "A fruit of unripe wisdom, and he himself is ignorant of what he islaughing at, or what he is about; --for that is, and ever will be,the best of sayings, That the useful is the noble and the hurtfulis the base. Very true. Here, then, is one difficulty in our law about women, which we maysay that we have now escaped; the wave has not swallowed us up alivefor enacting that the guardians of either sex should have all theirpursuits in common; to the utility and also to the possibility ofthis arrangement the consistency of the argument with itself bearswitness. Yes, that was a mighty wave which you have escaped. Yes, I said, but a greater is coming; you will of this when you seethe next. @@ -1776,16 +1776,16 @@ I have no objection; proceed. First, I think that if our rulers and their auxili That is right, he said. You, I said, who are their legislator, having selected the men, willnow select the women and give them to them; --they must be as faras possible of like natures with them; and they must live in commonhouses and meet at common meals, None of them will have anything speciallyhis or her own; they will be together, and will be brought up together,and will associate at gymnastic exercises. And so they will be drawnby a necessity of their natures to have intercourse with each other--necessity is not too strong a word, I think? Yes, he said; --necessity, not geometrical, but another sort of necessitywhich lovers know, and which is far more convincing and constrainingto the mass of mankind. True, I said; and this, Glaucon, like all the rest, must proceed afteran orderly fashion; in a city of the blessed, licentiousness is anunholy thing which the rulers will forbid." "Summary: The text discusses the law about women and children in a society, exploring the potential benefits and challenges of having common wives and children. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The speaker and his interlocutor -Time setting: Contemporary -Fuzzy place: Unnamed city" I said I’d like to see the law as regards women and children. He said: “Women are allowed one husband, but they may have all the children they can support.” I said: “But suppose a woman has no husband?” He said: “Then she is forbidden to have any children.” I said: “What about those who have illegitimate children?” He said: “They are not regarded as citizens; their parents are not permitted to rear them; they are taken away from them and brought up in special institutions where they are taught trades or arts.” I said: “Is it your custom to enquire whether people intend to have children before you give them wives?” He said: “No; that is our custom.” I said: “But isn’t it possible that some men may be so reckless and extravagant as to ruin themselves by having too many children?” He said: “Yes; but this difficulty is met by giving every man, if he likes, two wives. If he has more than two children, he has to pay for all but the two except in cases of twins.” I said: “And what happens if the same man has twins several times over?” He said: “Why, then, he pays for the others.” I said: “And how does the law regard a man who has three or four wives?” He said: “Why, he’s generally considered rich.” I said: “And when a man dies, do his wives share his property equally?” He said: “Certainly not; the sons inherit the property and divide it among themselves and the mothers.” I said: “And what happens if there are no sons?” He said: “The daughters get the property and marry other husbands, and the mothers also marry again.” I said: “How noble! And how delightful!” “And what next?” he asked. I said: “Next, I should like to know the position of women in your community.” He said: “Why, they are slaves, with only one privilege—the privilege of being bought and sold.” “But surely,” I said, “you must have some reason for treating them like cattle.” “We certainly have,” he replied; “and we hope soon to obtain the sanction of the State to our custom.” “And what is the reason?” I asked. “Because,” he answered, “we find that our women are capable of bearing children without any help from men.” “That is an extraordinary statement,” I said; “but I should very much like to hear how it arose.” “Well, then,” he said, “when Apollo became enamoured of Semele, he gave her a child by her, whose name was Dionysus. After this, he begat on Persephone Triptolemus, who first introduced the cultivation of corn among men. Now the child Dionysus, when he grew up, fell in love with Ariadne, the daughter of Minos. +Time setting: 1950s +Fuzzy place: Unnamed city" "I'm not saying that the law in this society is right, but it is the law. And any man who kills a woman is going to be punished whether he's killed her for adultery or for anything else."""" That was harsh,"" she said. ""You don't have to put it like that. You know how much I hate violence."""" It may be harsh,"" he said, ""but it's true. And it's the truth that matters here."""" But you wouldn't kill me if I were guilty, would you?"""" Yes."" Her eyes grew large. """"You mean you'd kill your own wife if you found out she had an affair?"""" If she had an affair with another man in our city, yes. We are very strict about that."""" Strict?"" He laughed. ""It can be fatal. Not just for the woman. For the children as well."""" What do you mean?"" In our society, there are common wives and common children. The children belong to the entire family. If a wife has an affair, the husband may take all the children and kill them. They're his property and they belong to him."""" And what if he doesn't want to kill them?"" Then he can sell them. There's always someone willing to buy children."""" I see."" She nodded slowly. ""That sounds pretty awful."""" Well, we are a tough people,"" he said. ""We have a rough life in some ways. There are lots of things about our society that you might find barbaric."""" But if I lived here,"" she said, ""you wouldn't have to worry about my having an affair with another man. Because I wouldn't. I'm not that kind of person."""" I hope so,"" he said. ""Because if you were, you would be in great danger."""" 3. THE STOLEN CHILDREN Lieutenant Cramer looked across the desk at the detective. Tell me again why you came to see me,"" he said. ""I thought I already did."" You told me you had information about some stolen children,"" Cramer said. Yes,"" Wolfe said. ""And now I want you to tell me something about those children. How old are they?"""" About four years old."" How many of them are there?"" Four. Three boys and a girl."""" All four were born here in New York?"" No. One of the boys and the girl were born here; the other boy was born in Chicago and the other girl was born in Philadelphia."""" Oh,"" Cramer said, ""that explains it. So you can't identify them yourself, can you?"""" No. I have never seen them."" Did you come here to talk about those children?"" No. I came because I wanted to make a deal with you about them."""" A deal?"" Yes. I've been trying to get hold of one of the mothers, but it's very difficult. I thought maybe you could help me. I'll pay you a thousand dollars if you can bring her to me."""" Cramer stared at him. " 72 72 "Yes, he said, and it ought not to be permitted. Then clearly the next thing will be to make matrimony sacred in thehighest degree, and what is most beneficial will be deemed sacred? Exactly. And how can marriages be made most beneficial? --that is a questionwhich I put to you, because I see in your house dogs for hunting,and of the nobler sort of birds not a few. Now, I beseech you, dotell me, have you ever attended to their pairing and breeding? In what particulars? Why, in the first place, although they are all of a good sort, arenot some better than others? @@ -1805,16 +1805,16 @@ To be sure, he said. And I think that our braver and better youth, besides their True. And the proper officers, whether male or female or both, for officesare to be held by women as well as by men -- Yes -- The proper officers will take the offspring of the good parents tothe pen or fold, and there they will deposit them with certain nurseswho dwell in a separate quarter; but the offspring of the inferior,or of the better when they chance to be deformed, will be put awayin some mysterious, unknown place, as they should be. Yes, he said, that must be done if the breed of the guardians is tobe kept pure." "Summary: The text discusses the importance of making marriages beneficial and the role of rulers in regulating population growth. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Enlightenment +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, Glaucon -Time setting: Contemporary -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "Ein richtiges Paar ist eben das, wofr ich suchen werde. Und wenn wir eins gefunden haben, so werden wir uns nicht drehen und wenden, um nach einem anderen zu sehen."""" Ich sehe, da Sie sehr praktisch sind"", sagte Glaucon lachend. """"Aber denken Sie doch einmal daran, da man berhaupt nur eine so kleine Anzahl von guten Partnern hat, und nun wollen Sie sich mit der Wahl solcher beschrnken!"""" Das ist ein Fehler des alten Mosaikwerkes"", erwiderte Socrates, ""da es nicht mehr als zwei Farben hatte: Weies und Schwarzes; sonst wre das Geschft besser gelaufen. Aber jetzt brauchen wir drei Farben: Weies, Schwarz und Rot, und dann wird die Arbeit schneller vorwrts gehen. Und nun, mein Freund, lassen Sie uns erst einen kurzen Blick auf diese Gesetze werfen. Es sind noch einige Artikel da, die mir gar nicht gefallen."""" 1. """"Jeder Mann soll seine Tochter zur Heirat geben; und wenn sie bereits jungfrulich ist, so wird ihm ein Haufen Salz in die Nase gestreut"""", sagte Glaucon und las weiter: 2. """"Die Brder sollen ihre Schwester untereinander teilen; und wenn sie ohne Mann stirbt, so wird sie dem Starksten ihres Geschlechts zugeschlagen"""". 3. """"Wenn ein Mann keine Kinder hat, so soll er sein Eigentum verkaufen und von seinen Eltern wieder fortgehen."""" 4. """"Niemand darf bei der Zahlung seiner Schulden Rckhalt machen; wer aber unerwartet mhsam ward, so kann er den Rcker fr den Zeitraum, in welchem ihn die Krankheit behindert hat, verschieben."""" 5. """"Kein Mensch soll Geldstrafen bezahlen; denn das ist eine entsetzliche Art der Bestrafung, die blo die Wut weckt, aber keinen Gehorsam hervorbringt."""" 6. """"Bei allen Prozessen sollen die Rechtssprecher und Schiedsrichter selbst die Kost beitragen."""" 7. """"Wer zum ersten Male erscheint, so mu er sich anhalten und viermal umkehren, damit ihn die Gtter erblicken; dann soll er ehrerbietig die Gromutter, die Gtterinnen und die Gtter grssen, und dann darf er sich durch die Stadt begeben, aber nicht in die Nhe der Tempel und der Statuen der Gtter kommen; am vierten Tage soll er sich ganz frei bewegen und sich auch mit seinen Freunden treffen; und am fnften Tage mag er wieder die Stadt verlassen oder in ihr bleiben. Wer aber zum zweiten Mal kommt, so mu er das gleiche thun, aber neun Tage lang; und wer zum dritten Mal kommt, so mu er dreizehn Tage lang daselbst sein. Dies gilt natrlich auch fr alle Auslnder, die ins Land kommen."""" 8. """"Nur jene auslndischen Staaten knnen freundschaftliche Verbindungen eingehen, deren Vlkergemeinschaft sich nicht von ihren Gttern trennt und deren Gtter dem Zeus nahestehen; sonst sind alle Handelsverbindungen verboten. Nur wenn das Volk oder die Regierung eines fremden Landes Feinde unserer Gtter sind, so ist der Krieg erklrt. Wenn aber die Regierenden der Fremden uns feindlich gesonnen sind, so sind sie alle Tote; die Gtter haben sie dahingerafft, und wir erkennen keinen neuen Herrscher an. Alle Auslnder, die sich hier niederlassen, mssen dem Staat angehren. " +Time setting: 1950s +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "I have no wish to discourage you, Socrates. But I may say that the emphasis will be on efficiency rather than on sentiment."""" You'll certainly get good results if you leave it to me,"" said Socrates. ""But as a matter of fact, your problem is one which is bound to arise from time to time. We want marriages to be beneficial; but people being what they are, there's going to be an awful lot of sex, and most of it will be bad. The sooner we recognize this, the better chance we stand of coping with it. You're lucky in having Glaucon here. He understands these things."""" Glaucon nodded in acknowledgment. Yes,"" he said. ""It was a stroke of luck finding him. We were saying just now that he must be the only man in America who's been in the KGB."""" In Russia too,"" said Socrates. ""They had a good organization, for its purpose, but they were handicapped by their lack of realism about human nature. They wanted marriage to be a solemn sacrament between two idealists. They didn't foresee the number of times that one or both of them would become dissatisfied and start looking around for something better."""" Don't you think that's why so many of them turned out to be psychopathic?"" said Glaucon. Exactly. That's why I say that you've been lucky to find me. I'm not idealistic at all. I'm as hardboiled as you could wish. But I believe in marriage, and I know how to make it work. You should have seen the way those Englishmen knocked about their wives! And then they'd complain because we wouldn't give them any new ones. It was their own fault. They ought to have treated their old ones better. That's my motto: Treat 'em mean to keep 'em keen. If you treat a woman like a goddess, she soon starts feeling bored and resentful. She wants to know why you aren't interested in her any more. Well, you tell her you're not interested because you've got other things to occupy your mind. And do you know what happens next?"""" No,"" said the President, fascinated. """"What does happen next?"""" She asks you when you're going to divorce her,"" said Socrates. ""And then you can throw her out on her ear and send for another one."""" You don't seem to realize,"" said the President, ""that we don't want divorces. Our whole policy is based on encouraging permanency of marriage. And you talk as if you want us to encourage adultery."""" Not at all,"" said Socrates. ""All I'm saying is that it's bound to go on, and it might as well be controlled. If people are going to be unfaithful, let's have some kind of sensible arrangement for regulating population growth. As things are at present, every little bastard that's born has a perfect right to claim American citizenship."""" " 73 73 "They will provide for their nurture, and will bring the mothers tothe fold when they are full of milk, taking the greatest possiblecare that no mother recognizes her own child; and other wet-nursesmay be engaged if more are required. Care will also be taken thatthe process of suckling shall not be protracted too long; and themothers will have no getting up at night or other trouble, but willhand over all this sort of thing to the nurses and attendants. You suppose the wives of our guardians to have a fine easy time ofit when they are having children. Why, said I, and so they ought. Let us, however, proceed with ourscheme. We were saying that the parents should be in the prime oflife? @@ -1827,16 +1827,16 @@ Very true, he replied. This applies, however, only to those who are within the s That also, he said, is a reasonable proposition. But how will theyknow who are fathers and daughters, and so on? They will never know. The way will be this: --dating from the dayof the hymeneal, the bridegroom who was then married will call allthe male children who are born in the seventh and tenth month afterwardshis sons, and the female children his daughters, and they will callhim father, and he will call their children his grandchildren, andthey will call the elder generation grandfathers and grandmothers.All who were begotten at the time when their fathers and mothers cametogether will be called their brothers and sisters, and these, asI was saying, will be forbidden to inter-marry. This, however, isnot to be understood as an absolute prohibition of the marriage ofbrothers and sisters; if the lot favours them, and they receive thesanction of the Pythian oracle, the law will allow them. Quite right, he replied. Such is the scheme, Glaucon, according to which the guardians of ourState are to have their wives and families in common. And now youwould have the argument show that this community is consistent withthe rest of our polity, and also that nothing can be better --wouldyou not?" "Summary: The text discusses the care and nurture of mothers and children, as well as the prohibition of certain marriages. -Enunciation: Third-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonism +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Glaucon, narrator -Time setting: Contemporary -Absolute place: A clubhouse in Los Angeles" """""No; if they are going to be mothers and bring up children, it's different. They have to know all about cooking and housework and looking after babies."""" But Glaucon objected that in that case there were two sets of women, one set for the philosophers and one set for everybody else; and it would be hard on the non-philosophers to take their wives away from them. Then we explained that the real mother and child business could be done by the low-grade women who had no intellectual capacity. The high-grade women would be like wet nurses, doing the early care and feeding, then handing over the baby to the mother when he got old enough to be weaned. That way the mother and child wouldn't lose contact, and the woman who did the nursing would still have plenty of time for philosophy."""" Did it work?"" Sure! In fact, you'd be surprised how little time is needed for bringing up a child if you don't get sentimental about it. But I'll admit there was a drawback: they couldn't have any other kind of marriage than artificial insemination."""" We didn't see why not,"""" said the narrator. """"Surely if they're interested in philosophy they'd rather raise a child than go through the usual sex routine?"""" Well, maybe,"" said the other. ""But there was another reason: the prohibition against certain marriages. You may remember the legend of the Greek god Zeus and a mortal girl named Io."" The narrator nodded. """"Yes,"""" he said. """"I remember that when Zeus saw her naked she turned into a white cow and he turned her into a black cow and back again."""" Yes, that's the version I heard. As a matter of fact, the story wasn't exactly like that, but close enough for our purpose. You see, we had found out that there were some people who weren't really fit for marriage."""" No kidding?"" said the narrator, impressed. ""Who were they?"" Oh, anybody who couldn't control his temper or hadn't self-respect or who was too materialistic or just plain lousy. The list went on and on. Anyhow, the ancient Greeks thought that the offspring of such people would be defective; so they made a law saying that those people couldn't marry at all."""" No kidding?"" said the narrator. ""That sounds pretty hardboiled."""" It was,"" agreed the other. ""And it worked just as well as the other laws. All we had to do was to make sure that nobody married without our permission, and enforce the prohibition."""" And what happened to the people who broke the law?"" Well, first of all, their wives divorced them,"" said the other, laughing. ""Then we took the kids away from them and put them in special schools for defectives. At least, that's what we called them. " +Time setting: 1950s +Absolute place: A clubhouse in Los Angeles" I don’t suppose any of you had the pleasure of meeting her mother. The poor old girl was a flitter. I used to go out with Glaucon once in a while, and he’d take me home to supper sometimes; it was only about five blocks from here. He had a place on the third floor, right over his office. We used to come in and have a little bite with the old lady; she used to set the table herself. She was about seventy-five years old, and she’d always be trying to fix me up with some of her clothes, because she said I looked like such a ragamuffin. Once she asked me if I didn’t think it was about time I got married, and suggested that I try to get hold of one of Glaucon’s girls, as they were all good-looking and well-brought-up young women. “But,” she added, “you’ll have to be careful which one you choose, because they’re not all alike. You must never marry a girl whose mother is an Aryan.” “Why not?” I asked. “Because,” she said, “they’re all breeders of criminals. They’re very attractive and entertaining when they’re young, but if you ever make them angry or quarrel with them they’ll turn vicious. Their children are usually epileptics, and most of their husbands go crazy after awhile. If you want a sensible wife, you should pick one whose mother wasn’t an Aryan.” “But why shouldn’t I marry one of your own daughters?” “Because,” she said, “they’re even worse than the Aryans. None of my daughters has ever had a normal child. They’ve all been either still-born or deformed, and the few that lived long enough to become mothers had children who were idiots or morons. All of us, including Glaucon and his sisters, are descended from the ancient Hellenes, and we’ve all got a little Jewish blood in our veins. It’s the mixture of the Semite and the Nordic that causes it. When two people of pure Nordic stock marry, they usually have healthy children, but when they mate with Jews their children are nearly always sickly. So if you want a good-looking, intelligent family of children, you should marry a woman who isn’t more than half Jewish. There’s no sense in taking chances, and the risk is much greater if the woman happens to be an Aryan.” And so,” concluded the man with a chuckle, “that’s how I learned how to tell who the murderers were! I could never understand why Glaucon was so keen on picking up all those blonde wenches. I remember once when he brought one home with him he was talking to her in Greek, and he said: ‘Stop looking at me like that! Do you think I’m a Hellenic? You can tell by my eyes that I’m a Jew.’” The man laughed again. “He was perfectly right,” he added. “You can always tell a Hellenic by his eyes. 74 74 "Yes, certainly. Shall we try to find a common basis by asking of ourselves what oughtto be the chief aim of the legislator in making laws and in the organizationof a State, --what is the greatest I good, and what is the greatestevil, and then consider whether our previous description has the stampof the good or of the evil? By all means. Can there be any greater evil than discord and distraction and pluralitywhere unity ought to reign? or any greater good than the bond of unity? There cannot. And there is unity where there is community of pleasures and pains--where all the citizens are glad or grieved on the same occasionsof joy and sorrow? @@ -1856,14 +1856,14 @@ Fellow-rulers. And what in ours? Fellow-guardians. Did you ever know an example Yes, very often. And the friend he regards and describes as one in whom he has an interest,and the other as a stranger in whom he has no interest? Exactly. But would any of your guardians think or speak of any other guardianas a stranger? Certainly he would not; for every one whom they meet will be regardedby them either as a brother or sister, or father or mother, or sonor daughter, or as the child or parent of those who are thus connectedwith him." "Summary: The text discusses the importance of unity and common feelings in a well-ordered state. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic dialogues -Active character: The legislator, the speaker" C'est dans un etat bien regle, ou l'unité est établie par les mêmes sentiments, que l'on peut trouver des juges. —— Il faut qu'ils soient tous de même âge, continua le legislateur, pour ne pas être inégaux. —— Quand vous avez une justice qui n'est ni injuste ni insuffisante, répondit le disciple, alors on pourra se servir des juges; mais tant que vous ne serez pas en état de former des juges, il faudra vous passer d'eux, ou les remédier par des règles plus fortes. —— Je crois que je sais ce que vous voulez dire, dit Polytropos: vous m'avez déjà fait remarquer qu'il y a un certain nombre d'institutions qui sont si justes, si naturelles, si nécessaires que la nature elle-même en a placé la source dans nos entrailles. —— Sans aucun doute, reprit le législateur; j'ai pensé que ce genre de lois était particulièrement propre à réglementer les relations du mariage, et surtout celles de la procréation. —— C'est bien ce que je voulais dire, poursuivit Polytropos; et je n'ai garde de contredire la doctrine de mon maître, qui me semble avoir raison quand il dit que cette institution est essentielle à l'ordre de la société, car c'est bien là un lien supérieur qui unit entre eux toutes les parties d'un Etat. —— Ainsi, dans le rôle que vous m'attribuez, reprit le législateur, je suis en même temps un guerrier, un magistrat et un père de famille? —— Certainement, répliqua son disciple; cela résulte de votre profession de législateur. —— Eh! mon Dieu! s'écria-t-il, voilà une position vraiment singulière! moi, je suis un guerrier qui n'a jamais combattu; un magistrat qui n'a point de citoyens; un père de famille qui n'a point de femmes et qui n'est pas marié! —— Vous allez bientôt prendre femme, dit Polytropos en souriant; vous devriez remercier le hasard qui vous a fait rencontrer une belle épouse. —— Mais, reprit le législateur, si l'on veut que je prétends, sans rien savoir, à la direction d'un Etat, comment pourrai-je remplir un tel rôle? —— La seule manière de réussir, dit le disciple, serait d'imaginer quels sont les principes fondamentaux de la vie sociale, et de faire tenir les institutions de l'Etat sur ces bases. +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: The legislator, the speaker" """""The legislator of the future will have to be a criminal. He will know how to use the nerves of the people, and the shuddering which he will cause in them will lead them into unity and happiness."""" At this point the speaker was interrupted by an ironical exclamation: """"How nice it would be if we could all live in a state of perpetual hysteria!"""" The legislator's reply to this was as follows: You say 'perpetual.' But you forget that the feeling is there already, and that the legislator will only bring it to expression. I'll tell you what we must do. We must arouse the nervous system of the community with every possible means. Electricity has already been introduced into the cinema, so that you can see lightning in its full reality on the screen. In the same way we shall introduce electricity into our theatres, and make use of the most recent scientific discoveries for the production of a nervous impression. We will give the public the shock treatment, and so produce common feelings and ideas. We will create an artificial psychosis, and then we shall be able to mould men according to our pleasure."""" This idea is very good,"" said the lady from the front row. ""And the theatre will become much more interesting than it is now."""" Precisely,"" replied the speaker. ""We shall be able to exploit art in a manner such as has never yet been dreamt of. And we shall get rid of those swine of critics and aesthetes who are always talking about the beauty of art. They will be silenced, because we shall show them the real meaning of beauty."""" The speaker was interrupted again, and this time by the voice of a young man sitting near me. He said: What you want is nothing new. You merely want to imitate nature, and nature does the same thing with every animal, whether it be human or not. She over-stimulates the nervous system of the individual and makes him mad, so that he may become dangerous to his neighbours and kill them. Then the neighbours combine together and exterminate the mad animal."""" The speaker did not reply to this remark, but continued: You say 'mad.' But you forget that when people are crazy they often find the solution of problems which were insoluble before. Just as madness brings forth the genius, so it will also bring forth the legislator. The present age is a period of transition, and we have entered upon a new epoch. The old nations are breaking up, and we stand at the threshold of a new world which will be dominated by a single race."""" And what is the name of that race?"" asked the lady from the front row. Why, the race of the intellectuals, of course,"" was the reply. There was a general laugh at this, and the speaker went on: It is the task of the intellectuals to found a new order of society which shall be directed by reason alone. " 75 75 "Capital, I said; but let me ask you once more: Shall they be a familyin name only; or shall they in all their actions be true to the name?For example, in the use of the word 'father,' would the care of afather be implied and the filial reverence and duty and obedienceto him which the law commands; and is the violator of these dutiesto be regarded as an impious and unrighteous person who is not likelyto receive much good either at the hands of God or of man? Are theseto be or not to be the strains which the children will hear repeatedin their ears by all the citizens about those who are intimated tothem to be their parents and the rest of their kinsfolk? These, he said, and none other; for what can be more ridiculous thanfor them to utter the names of family ties with the lips only andnot to act in the spirit of them? Then in our city the language of harmony and concord will be moreoften beard than in any other. As I was describing before, when anyone is well or ill, the universal word will be with me it is well'or 'it is ill.' @@ -1881,16 +1881,16 @@ Certainly. To the elder shall be assigned the duty of ruling and chastising they Clearly. Nor can there be a doubt that the younger will not strike or do anyother violence to an elder, unless the magistrates command him; norwill he slight him in any way. For there are two guardians, shameand fear, mighty to prevent him: shame, which makes men refrain fromlaying hands on those who are to them in the relation of parents;fear, that the injured one will be succoured by the others who arehis brothers, sons, one wi fathers. That is true, he replied. Then in every way the laws will help the citizens to keep the peacewith one another? Yes, there will be no want of peace. And as the guardians will never quarrel among themselves there willbe no danger of the rest of the city being divided either againstthem or against one another." "Summary: The text discusses the importance of family ties and the common good in a well-ordered State. -Enunciation: Dialogue between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The speaker and the person being addressed -Time setting: Contemporary -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "Look at the family you belong to, and think what you owe to it, and then give me a straight answer."""" The speaker was a big, heavy-faced man of forty, with a great shock of coarse black hair, already sprinkled with grey. He had a dark red face, with deep lines across it, and heavy-lidded eyes which had a curious expression of alertness mingled with dreaminess. He wore a loose coat of black cloth, with an old-fashioned waistcoat, and he carried his hands in the pockets of his trousers, as though he had been accustomed to have them there all day long. As he stood before the door, with his legs apart, the sunlight gleaming upon his still ruddy face, he looked like some rough satyr of the mountains. And yet there was something about his voice and manner which made one feel that there was no physical labour for him, but only intellectual strife. So he stood, waiting for an answer, while his companion remained motionless, with his back against the wall, and his arms folded, looking at him over his shoulder. I don't care a damn for my family,"" said Mr. Turnbull, ""and I'm not going to give any such idiotic reasons as you suggest. You've got to prove your case against me, and you'd better begin."""" The other laughed, and turned away. Well,"" he said, ""we'll see how it shapes. We know each other pretty well, so we may as well cut out this sort of fencing. I believe in the common good of a State, and I believe in the duties of the citizen to his country. You seem to be under another impression. All right; we shall find out who is right sooner or later. In the meantime, if you will come into the house, I've something to show you."""" Mr. Turnbull followed him into the room where they had supped together. On the table lay the sheaf of papers which had been brought by the servant, and the young lawyer picked up the first of them. Here's the stuff,"" he said; ""I suppose you know what it means?"""" I've seen enough of it,"" answered Turnbull shortly. The first document was a bill of sale, in form, executed by Turnbull, on the 5th of May, in favour of A. B., for the sum of four hundred pounds. It was signed by Turnbull, and witnessed by the Greek philosopher. The next paper was dated the 6th of May, and was a receipt by the same A. B. for the payment of the sum of four hundred pounds by Turnbull. The third paper was a cheque for the same amount drawn by Turnbull on his bank, and endorsed by A. B. The fourth was a receipt for the cheque, from the Bank of England. There were several other similar documents, covering the months of June and July. The papers were in order, and bore the evidences of having been duly executed and acted upon. " +Time setting: 1950s +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "You got the idea right enough, but you weren't sure. I said I was on my way to see my daughter, and that she had a kid with her, and you wanted to know what kind of kid it was."""" A two-foot kid,"" I said. ""And I figured you were going to start in looking for it as soon as we were through talking."""" Right again."" He nodded grimly. """"And after I found out from your daughter it was an eight-year-old boy, then what?"""" He didn't wait for an answer. It's easy enough to figure. You're a family man yourself, aren't you? Well, what if somebody came around here and asked you where your wife and kids were living? And gave you the high hat when you tried to tell him?"""" He waited again, and when I didn't say anything he went on: """"Just try it some time. Ask any cop in this town what he thinks about strangers giving him the high hat. Then you'll understand why I'm sore at your friend and his partner."""" They gave you the high hat?"" I said. ""You mean they wouldn't give you their names or anything?"""" Names?"" he said. ""They didn't have to. All they had to do was walk up and start sticking their noses into my business. That does it."""" But why?"" I said. ""I can see why you don't like it, but why do you think they did it?"""" Why?"" he said. ""What do you think I've been telling you? Because they're strangers. I told you what happened in San Francisco. Hell, look at the papers. Look at any paper, and you'll find something. A few years ago there was a case down South somewhere, Mississippi or Tennessee or one of those places, and some guy came in and accused a doctor of poisoning his wife with arsenic, just because he wasn't from around there. Maybe you read about it. Hell, yes, you read about it. Everybody read about it. The whole country talked about it."""" Sure,"" I said. ""But I don't see what that has to do with us. We're not poisoning anybody."""" Oh, no?"" he said. ""Oh, no?"""" He was looking at me steadily now, and I felt a chill run up my back. """"Look,"""" he said, """"you might be harmless enough, and maybe you're telling me the truth, but how do I know?"""" How do you know?"" I said. ""What the hell do you think I am, a sap?"""" He shook his head slowly. """"No,"""" he said. """"Not a sap. Just stupid."""" Stupid!"" I said. ""Stupid! Listen, mister, I'd like to knock you down. If you weren't a cop, you'd probably get knocked down every day."""" I'm glad,"" he said. ""I hope you will. Now listen, and maybe you'll learn something. You're a stranger in this town, aren't you?"""" " 76 76 "None whatever. I hardly like even to mention the little meannesses of which theywill be rid, for they are beneath notice: such, for example, as theflattery of the rich by the poor, and all the pains and pangs whichmen experience in bringing up a family, and in finding money to buynecessaries for their household, borrowing and then repudiating, gettinghow they can, and giving the money into the hands of women and slavesto keep --the many evils of so many kinds which people suffer in thisway are mean enough and obvious enough, and not worth speaking of. Yes, he said, a man has no need of eyes in order to perceive that. And from all these evils they will be delivered, and their life willbe blessed as the life of Olympic victors and yet more blessed. @@ -1905,14 +1905,14 @@ You have anticipated the question which I was about to suggest. There is no difficulty, I said, in seeing how war will be carriedon by them. How? Why, of course they will go on expeditions together; and will takewith them any of their children who are strong enough, that, afterthe manner of the artisan's child, they may look on at the work whichthey will have to do when they are grown up; and besides looking onthey will have to help and be of use in war, and to wait upon theirfathers and mothers. Did you never observe in the arts how the potters'boys look on and help, long before they touch the wheel? Yes, I have. And shall potters be more careful in educating their children andin giving them the opportunity of seeing and practising their dutiesthan our guardians will be?" "Summary: The text discusses the benefits of a community where men and women share a common life, education, and children. -Enunciation: First-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy -Active character: The narrator, the person being addressed" The community is to be an experiment, you understand. We shall have the best minds of the two sexes working together on every problem from baby-food to ethics and international law. No sex prejudices, no class barriers; just everybody cooperating for the common good of all. “And there’ll be plenty of room in our city for your kind of man. There won’t be any women around to interfere with your business, and the children will be under the care of a special department.” He made it sound like a sinister plot. I said I could see some sense in his viewpoint, though not much. But I still wanted to know what he was going to do with me. “We’ll let that ride awhile,” he said. “You can come along now and meet my wife.” I started to follow him. Then I stopped. “Wait a minute,” I said. “Where’s my stuff?” “What stuff?” “My clothes.” He looked at me and laughed. “You haven’t got anything on but a suit of skins,” he said. “What did you think you were wearing?” I don’t know what I thought I was wearing. I was suddenly conscious of my nakedness. It wasn’t so bad, actually. The hide didn’t chafe or anything. And it had been cleaned and oiled and cured by experts. It was quite comfortable. But I felt foolish. “I’d better get my clothes back,” I said. “Sure,” he agreed. “They’re right over here.” We went through the door into the building. The inside was as bare as the outside. At one end, on a table, I saw a pile of leather garments, folded neatly. They looked like something out of a Greek myth. “Put them on,” said the woman. “I’m afraid they’re a little large for you.” “Thanks.” I took them and went into the other room. As I pulled on the pants, which were all in one piece, I realized how shoddy my own clothes were. This was something built to last. And then I put on the tunic and the cloak and stood up and looked at myself in a mirror. “Not bad,” I said to the fellow who had brought me there. “I’m not so sure,” he said. “There are a lot of things wrong with it. But you look better than when you came in. Why don’t you go out and take a walk?” “Okay.” I went out. The cool air felt good on my skin. I walked down to the edge of the pool and sat down on a rock. From where I was I could look across to the opposite shore. I didn’t see any sign of a bridge. I wondered how I was going to get back. I began to feel hungry. I couldn’t remember having eaten since breakfast. +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: The narrator, the person being addressed" "Look at it from this angle. It gives us a community of men and women who share the same life, the same education, the same children. In these conditions there is no room for jealousy. I believe that we have made an ideal community. We are free to love each other, as men love women, women love men, children love parents. Jealousy has been banished from our lives."""" He turned his head away from her. The harsh, vivid light of the sunset was in his eyes. I don't believe you,"" she said. ""I don't believe it."" Yes, you do believe it,"" he said. ""You know it's true."""" You're mad,"" she said. She was afraid now, but she went on talking. """"You were never like this before. What has happened to you?"""" I am just beginning to be myself,"" he said, and smiled. His eyes went back to hers, and they were cold and hard and deadly. She felt something queer inside her, and sat down heavily. Her body began to shake. You haven't the faintest idea what I am going to do to you,"" he said. CHAPTER 9 IT WAS NIGHT when they got into the car. With the headlights shining straight ahead it was impossible to see anything except the road in front of them. I can't see anything,"" she said. There isn't anything to see,"" he said. ""There hasn't been anything to see since we left San Francisco."""" That's not true,"" she said. ""At least, it wasn't true until today. Before today there were always little signs, things to make you hope."""" What kind of signs?"" he asked. For example,"" she said, ""there were always telephone wires along the road."""" They are here,"" he said. ""Look carefully."" She saw them, and she laughed. He had put his arm across her shoulders, and she felt very close to him. I'm cold,"" she said. ""Put your arm around me."" He put his arm around her. I'm so tired,"" she said. ""Let's sleep a little."" If you want to."" I've been thinking about you all day,"" she said. ""I've been wondering if you'd ever really loved anyone before."""" No,"" he said. ""I didn't."" I thought so,"" she said. And after a moment: ""I used to think you did. I used to wonder which one of us it was."""" He took his arm away from her. """"What do you mean?"""" I used to think you might be in love with your sister,"""" she said. """"She's very beautiful, isn't she?"""" Is that what you've been thinking about all day?"" he asked. Yes,"" she said. ""And I wondered why you didn't tell me. I wanted you to tell me."""" Why should I tell you?"" he asked. " 77 77 "The idea is ridiculous, he said. There is also the effect on the parents, with whom, as with otheranimals, the presence of their young ones will be the greatest incentiveto valour. That is quite true, Socrates; and yet if they are defeated, whichmay often happen in war, how great the danger is! the children willbe lost as well as their parents, and the State will never recover. True, I said; but would you never allow them to run any risk? @@ -1933,17 +1933,17 @@ To that too, I agree. But you will hardly agree to my next proposal. What is you Capital, I said. That the brave man is to have more wives than othershas been already determined: and he is to have first choices in suchmatters more than others, in order that he may have as many childrenas possible?" "Summary: The text discusses the idea of children witnessing war and the potential consequences of military action. Trope: The brave soldier being honored and rewarded Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialogue between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, interlocutor -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" But it’s the most natural thing in the world to take a child along when you go to war, especially if he’s a boy.” “That’s where you’re wrong,” I said. “If a man takes his son with him to war, and then gets killed himself, who’s left to bring up the kid?” He looked at me as though I’d said something funny. “Aren’t they always glad to get someone who’s been in battle? They give them medals and parades and everything.” “Sure,” I said, “but how does that help the kid when he grows up and wants to know what happened to his old man? Just because he went to war and got himself killed he gets a medal and a parade, and all the little kids point at him and say, ‘There goes the man who killed your father.’” “You don’t mean you think those things should be kept secret?” “I certainly do,” I said. “If you want to keep children from ever seeing anything like war again, you’ve got to make sure they never find out what it’s like. If they knew what it was really like, they wouldn’t stand for it, and there wouldn’t be any more wars.” “Maybe you’re right,” he said. “But it’s hard to get people to understand these things. Take Socrates. He used to say the same sort of stuff. You remember the story?” “Yes, I remember it,” I said. “He was being cross-examined by Meletus, and Meletus accused him of corrupting the youth, and Socrates said, ‘If corrupting the youth means teaching them to tell the truth about war and the generals, then I plead guilty.’” “That’s right,” he said. “Socrates had an idea that if children could learn the truth about war, they wouldn’t grow up to be brave soldiers. And he was right, too. That’s why the generals got so sore at him, and why they tried to shut him up.” “But they didn’t shut him up,” I said. “The jury found him innocent.” “Yeah, but that was only because they were afraid of making trouble with Athens’ allies. Those guys were scared to death of Sparta, and they figured that if they let Socrates off, Sparta might not attack them. And besides, they liked Socrates; he was kind of funny. But they didn’t agree with him about war. They thought he was crazy.” “So did I,” I said. “But I’m beginning to see what he was talking about. It’s a funny thing. Here we are, trying to figure out who killed that guy, and here he is, lying dead on the floor, and nobody seems to care. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "Socrates. You know the old saying about children of war? If you have to go, take them along with you. I've seen a lot of guys who didn't want to be in the army because they had kids; but after they got in they'd look at those kids and think how tough it was going to be for them when they grew up without a father around, and then they'd volunteer to go into combat. I mean, what's the use of getting killed yourself if your kid is just as good as dead anyway? He'll never have a dad, so what does he care if his father gets blown away before or after he's born? Interlocutor. Yeah, that's true, I guess. Socrates. So they'd say, """"If I'm going to be killed anyway, I might as well get it over with right now."""" And they'd volunteer for combat. Interlocutor. I don't know. I still think it's horrible to expose a child to a sight like that. Socrates. Look, if you're going to have a kid, you should think about these things beforehand. Otherwise you shouldn't have a kid at all. A baby is a kind of gamble. It might turn out that the parents are going to be killed in an accident or something, and the baby will grow up without any family at all. Interlocutor. I suppose you could arrange for a relative to bring up the child in case something happens to the parents. Socrates. Yeah, but it wouldn't be the same as having your own parents. Kids need their own parents. That's the way God intended it. So you can't always plan everything ahead of time. There are some risks you just have to take. But what I meant to say was this: I've seen kids as young as three years old who have seen people shot and killed. They forget about it pretty quick, though, especially if it's somebody they don't know very well. So it's not really the same thing as exposing them to something that could happen to them personally. Interlocutor. Oh, I see what you mean. It's like watching a movie. Except that it isn't really like a movie. Socrates. Well, no, it isn't exactly like a movie. But it's sort of like a Hitchcock movie where they show you something awful happening and then you wonder whether it's going to happen again later on. Interlocutor. Yeah, that's right. Socrates. The only difference is that in a movie it doesn't really happen. In real life it does happen. Interlocutor. But it isn't really so bad as you make out. It's just that we're afraid of being killed ourselves. We imagine it will be much worse than it really is. Socrates. " 78 78 "Agreed. Again, there is another manner in which, according to Homer, braveyouths should be honoured; for he tells how Ajax, after he had distinguishedhimself in battle, was rewarded with long chines, which seems to bea compliment appropriate to a hero in the flower of his age, beingnot only a tribute of honour but also a very strengthening thing. Most true, he said. Then in this, I said, Homer shall be our teacher; and we too, at sacrificesand on the like occasions, will honour the brave according to themeasure of their valour, whether men or women, with hymns and thoseother distinctions which we were mentioning; also with seats of precedence, and meats and full cups; and in honouring them,we shall be at the same time training them. @@ -1965,16 +1965,16 @@ May I have the pleasure, he said, of hearing your opinion? Both should be forbidden, in my judgment; I would take the annualproduce and no more. Shall I tell you why? Pray do. Why, you see, there is a difference in the names 'discord' and 'war,'and I imagine that there is also a difference in their natures; theone is expressive of what is internal and domestic, the other of whatis external and foreign; and the first of the two is termed discord,and only the second, war. That is a very proper distinction, he replied. And may I not observe with equal propriety that the Hellenic raceis all united together by ties of blood and friendship, and alienand strange to the barbarians?" "Summary: The text discusses the proper ways to honor brave youths and soldiers, including how they should be rewarded, treated after death, and interact with other Hellenes. -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation Active character: Ajax, Homer, Hesiod -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "I had just been speaking of Ajax. The name had set him off. """"Listen,"""" he said, """"I can tell you a few things about that son of Telamon. First of all, he's the bravest young hellene I know. He's brave as a lion and strong as a bull. You've seen him in action."""" I had indeed, and his prowess had impressed me deeply. And then,"" continued the professor, ""he is one of the most gentlemanly fellows that ever drew breath. That's why I like him so well."""" I nodded. """"I'm glad to hear it,"""" I said, """"because I feel very strongly toward him. In fact, there are times when I wish I could take him up on his invitation and go home with him."""" Well, if you do,"" said the professor, ""remember that you're a Hellenic. Remember how you're expected to behave toward a Greek soldier who has done a great deed."""" How?"" I asked. Well,"" replied the professor, ""first of all, you must reward him for his valor. It's the Hellenes' right to be rewarded by the other Hellenes for deeds of valor. That's where our honor lies; that's what we live for. We Hellenes have been fighting for thousands of years for that honor; we fight and die for it today. If any man earns honor, it's a Hellenic. But remember, too, that after you reward him you must let him alone. A Hellenic doesn't want anything from you but your respect. If you respect him he'll respect you; if you don't, you can't expect anything else."""" What if he dies?"" I asked. ""What then? How should he be treated?"""" Why,"" said the professor, ""you treat his body as you would a god's. You strip off his armor and dress him in white robes. Then you take him to the sea-shore and bury him in the sand. You put gold ornaments and rich garments over him, and burn incense around him. And then you take his sword and carve his name and the names of his parents on it, and leave it by his side."""" Homer says something about that,"" I remarked, ""in the Odyssey."" So he does,"" said the professor, ""and Hesiod says something about it, too, in his poem about the shield of Achilles."""" Well,"" I said, ""it seems to me that the men who fought here were real soldiers, the kind that give the rest of us an idea of what the word 'soldier' means. What are they doing now?"""" They're back at their camps or wherever they came from,"" said the professor. ""They're probably drinking wine."""" Yes, they're probably doing that,"" I said. ""But I wonder what they're thinking about?"""" " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "But he was a big lad, and his father had made him promise that if ever he saw anything of Ajax he would punch him in the nose. I did not like to interfere. So I said nothing."""" And you let him go on to finish his dinner?"" said the Major in horror. Precisely,"" said Stalky. ""I didn't want to spoil his appetite. He will be back later. It's the only thing to do with brave young people. You should have seen his face when he realised what he had done!"""" The Major looked puzzled for an instant. Then he laughed. I believe you're right, Stalky. I'm beginning to see light. Well, keep an eye on him. We'll all three go into the matter together, shall we? And now for Homer and Hesiod."" They turned towards the door and met the little dark head of Ajax, who had been listening to everything from the top of the stairs. For just one second their eyes met. Then Ajax dropped down and went into the library, where he sat down at the card-table, rather pale. He had won every game except one that day, and the Major, feeling shaken by his interview with Stalky, was quite unaware that Ajax had laid aside his cards for the nonce. The Major read aloud from the first two books of the Iliad for half an hour, then said: Now, gentlemen, we've got to talk this out. Our boys are going to be fighting men very shortly, so it is our business to know how they ought to behave in war. First of all, we have to honour brave youths and soldiers. What does the Iliad tell us about that?"""" Ask your friend there,"" said Stalky, pointing to the silent figure at the table. """"He knows everything. He can answer any question better than a dictionary."""" Oh yes; I know my Greek all right, but I don't know much about soldiers or war,"" said Ajax, looking up. """"They say I'm clever in maths. My father says I ought to be a doctor."""" No; he won't be a doctor,"" said Stalky, who was watching him closely. ""We'll see to that."""" You think so?"" said Ajax. ""Why?"" Stalky drew his fingers across his throat. Yes, I see,"" said Ajax. ""That's a good idea. I haven't got any taste for killing people anyway. But what's the use of talking about ancient things like that? What we've got to find out is what kind of young men we are going to make out of these children. That's my job, isn't it?"""" That's my job too,"" said the Major. ""And Stalky's as well. I suppose you'd both like to hear what I think. " 79 79 "Very good, he said. And therefore when Hellenes fight with barbarians and barbarians withHellenes, they will be described by us as being at war when they fight,and by nature enemies, and this kind of antagonism should be calledwar; but when Hellenes fight with one another we shall say that Hellasis then in a state of disorder and discord, they being by nature friendsand such enmity is to be called discord. I agree. Consider then, I said, when that which we have acknowledged to bediscord occurs, and a city is divided, if both parties destroy thelands and burn the houses of one another, how wicked does the strifeappear! No true lover of his country would bring himself to tear inpieces his own nurse and mother: There might be reason in the conquerordepriving the conquered of their harvest, but still they would havethe idea of peace in their hearts and would not mean to go on fightingfor ever. Yes, he said, that is a better temper than the other. And will not the city, which you are founding, be an Hellenic city? @@ -1987,15 +1987,15 @@ I agree, he said, that our citizens should thus deal with their Hellenicenemies; Then let us enact this law also for our guardians:-that they are neitherto devastate the lands of Hellenes nor to burn their houses. Agreed; and we may agree also in thinking that these, all our previousenactments, are very good. But still I must say, Socrates, that if you are allowed to go on inthis way you will entirely forget the other question which at thecommencement of this discussion you thrust aside: --Is such an orderof things possible, and how, if at all? For I am quite ready to acknowledgethat the plan which you propose, if only feasible, would do all sortsof good to the State. I will add, what you have omitted, that yourcitizens will be the bravest of warriors, and will never leave theirranks, for they will all know one another, and each will call theother father, brother, son; and if you suppose the women to join theirarmies, whether in the same rank or in the rear, either as a terrorto the enemy, or as auxiliaries in case of need, I know that theywill then be absolutely invincible; and there are many domestic ticadvantages which might also be mentioned and which I also fully acknowledge:but, as I admit all these advantages and as many more as you please,if only this State of yours were to come into existence, we need sayno more about them; assuming then the existence of the State, letus now turn to the question of possibility and ways and means --therest may be left." "Summary: The text discusses the concept of war and its relationship to friendship and enmity. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Hellenes, barbarians, Socrates -Fuzzy place: Hellas" "But the Hellenes are at war with the barbarians, and therefore friends with one another, even though they may be enemies in other respects."""" That is a hard saying,"" said Cebes; ""for if every man were truly friends with all men, then all men would be in friendship with all men. But as it is, we know that this is not so; for there are many who would say that they are friends of me and yet hate me."" Nay,"" said Socrates; ""what you mean to say is that they profess friendship to you, but only for their own advantage, and are really your enemies, because they are enemies to you."""" And what do you mean,"" said Cebes, ""by being 'friends for their own advantage'?"""" I mean,"" said Socrates, ""that they profess friendship, and have an appearance of being friendly to you, while they do you harm."" Then again,"" said Cebes, ""do you call those who harm their friends enemies?"" Certainly,"" said Socrates; ""and those who help them friends. For example, when a man feeds me, he helps me; and when he helps me, he is my friend, and I am his friend; and on the same principle if he kills me he does me the greatest possible injury, and thereby proves himself to be my enemy, and me to be his enemy. And again, if I think that anyone harms me, then I also think that I shall harm him, and therefore I am his enemy; and if I harm him, then I shall be harming myself in returning evil for good, and therefore I should never return evil for good. And that is why a good man will never make a bad man his friend."" And where did you get all this, Socrates?"" asked Cebes; ""and how do you know that a good man will never make a bad man his friend?"""" The reason why,"" replied Socrates, ""is that when a good man has done his best to persuade a bad man of his error, and failed, he will cease to waste time in words, knowing that he can no longer save either himself or his enemy from the consequences of his own folly. Wherefore he will henceforth hold him to be altogether useless, whether in jest or in earnest, and will desire to have nothing more to do with him; for he will regard him as a burden which he is no longer able to carry, and as a nuisance to himself and everybody else. He will, moreover, be afraid of bringing any further trouble upon himself and his own, and so he will be unwilling to retain or acquire such an acquaintance. And when he finds that he is hated by him whom he cannot benefit, he will see that he is utterly foolish and senseless, and will be quite content to let things remain as they are. " +Fuzzy place: Hellas" I have spoken of war and peace, but I will speak to you now about friends and enemies. It is natural that we should be friends with those who are like us, and it is equally natural that we should be enemies with those who are unlike us. But if we go further, and say that a man is not only our enemy but also our foe, then we have come to something which is harsh and vivid, as the words themselves show, and far removed from friendship. And when we add that he who is a foe is a barbarian, then we mean that he is an utter stranger whom we do not even allow to be a man at all; and this is what we Hellenes mean by saying that the barbarians are naturally the foes of Hellas. Nor would we ever have admitted them into the city in any way except as slaves; for we know that whenever they come inside our walls they make mischief. But now Socrates has been telling me that all men are akin, and that he who says that the Barbarians are naturally the foes of Hellas is either ignorant or mad. He added that these were his own notions, and that he had learned them from me. For my part, I am ashamed to confess that I was so astonished at these words that I could only stare at him without answering, and I felt as if I had been struck dumb. 80 80 "If I loiter for a moment, you instantly make a raid upon me, I said,and have no mercy; I have hardly escaped the first and second waves,and you seem not to be aware that you are now bringing upon me thethird, which is the greatest and heaviest. When you have seen andheard the third wave, I think you be more considerate and will acknowledgethat some fear and hesitation was natural respecting a proposal soextraordinary as that which I have now to state and investigate. The more appeals of this sort which you make, he said, the more determinedare we that you shall tell us how such a State is possible: speakout and at once. Let me begin by reminding you that we found our way hither in thesearch after justice and injustice. @@ -2012,15 +2012,15 @@ Certainly, he replied. I think, I said, that there might be a reform of the Stat What is it? he said. Now then, I said, I go to meet that which I liken to the greatestof the waves; yet shall the word be spoken, even though the wave breakand drown me in laughter and dishonour; and do you mark my words. Proceed. I said: Until philosophers are kings, or the kings and princes ofthis world have the spirit and power of philosophy, and politicalgreatness and wisdom meet in one, and those commoner natures who pursueeither to the exclusion of the other are compelled to stand aside,cities will never have rest from their evils, --nor the human race,as I believe, --and then only will this our State have a possibilityof life and behold the light of day. Such was the thought, my dearGlaucon, which I would fain have uttered if it had not seemed tooextravagant; for to be convinced that in no other State can therebe happiness private or public is indeed a hard thing." "Summary: The speaker discusses the possibility of a just and ideal State, acknowledging that it may never be fully realized but still worth striving for. Narrative arc: Philosophical exploration and argument -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue Active character: The speaker, Glaucon Fuzzy place: Unnamed location -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "I don't know whether you've observed that, when I am stuck in a difficulty, and another person suggests some solution which I can't refuted for the moment, I have a habit of dreamily saying after him 'Yes, to be sure,' and then inventing nothing to what he has said? Sometimes, however, at a later time I am able to refute him. That is what I have been doing with you: I want you to suppose the just city and the just man as having been brought into existence; for thus far I think that I have not entirely failed in my endeavour to accomplish the task which you set me."""" Yes, yes,"" said Glaucon, ""we have surely done a fine piece of work."""" And now the next thing is that we should show the nature of injustice and of the unjust man in relation to justice and the just man. I don't mean by way of definition, for there would be no great difficulty in giving a general definition which would embrace every kind of injustice: the only difficulty is to distinguish each one of them from all other vices. For example, there is the sort of life which people live who are called cowards. Would you like us to try and take this species of injustice first?"""" By all means."" Then shall we say that cowards are unjust and that the courage which is in opposition to them is justice? Or don't even they appear to you to be acting justly when they run away and give up their arms?"""" Certainly not by any means."" Neither do I think that the just man, if he is a good man, will ever desert his post willingly or forsake his friends when they are in danger."""" No,"" said Glaucon, ""that would be quite out of keeping with his character."" Then again, would you call anyone an unjust man who, when any expedition was going to be undertaken by the State legally and in accordance with right, is the last to take part in it?"" Certainly not."" Nor, on the other hand, would you call him just who is always the first to volunteer for public service?"" No indeed."" Then again, if a man were required to go on an errand and refused, would you call him just because he had foreseen that the business was likely to turn out ill and so declined to run risks?"""" Certainly not."" And yet all these considerations together make up the virtue of temperature, and temperature is justice."""" Perhaps, but does not temperature differ from justice?"""" How?"" Because,"" he said, ""temperature has to do with pleasures and pains, and is concerned with the indulgence or restraint of them, whereas justice, as we said, has to do with rights and wrongs. And therefore, as I believe, temperature is the handmaid of justice, and only an accessory to her. If you like, I may attempt to explain to you in what way the possession of either temperance or courage may make a man more just or less just."""" " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" But suppose that a just and an ideal State were once was once, mind you!—to be established; still I fear that if the tyrant of such a State were to find in his own possessions any trace of a rational being, he would want to destroy him. There is no place for him in the world of which the tyrant is king. The pangs of giving him up might be compared to the grief of Sophocles, who, after having created a glorious creature such as might have been the saviour of Athens, was compelled, as he himself says, to “make him out of ploughman’s wood,” and then leading him forth adds: “Thou art a bastard, and yet I loved thee; but there is a danger lest thou shouldest prove ungrateful, and take away the victory from Athens.” And even now, at this very moment, I feel the same fear about the offspring of my genius; for I am sure that there is something ideal about them, and that nothing which is only human or animal will ever be able to satisfy them in their thoughts or aspirations. And though they might follow after many things, and seem to themselves, and to every one else, to have found that which they sought, nevertheless they would forget whatever they had gained through sorrow and vexation of spirit, and would endure hardships a thousand times over in search of what they had left behind. “And has not each of us often left behind him whatever he most valued on earth, and lost it by some mishap on his way, and made himself more unhappy by the recollection of it than he was before by the possession of it?” “That has happened to me, Adeimantus,” said Glaucon. “Yes, friend,” I replied, “and that is the reason why true philosophers are always the most devoted servants of the State.” “How so?” “Because in the true philosopher, wonderful as it may appear, there is a divine element which ever draws him near to the heavens. And because he is always dimly hovering between earth and heaven he is never at rest or settled on either, and whenever with sadened thought he contemplates the sea of evils into which humankind has fallen he yearns for the upper abode of the gods, and despising the vulgar honour which is bestowed upon the virtuous and the good by mean and impure souls, he dedicates himself to the honour which is appointed by God, and which is the best for man,—above all, of having truly great thoughts; he would fain educate the world, and seek to lead astray none, but rather to make all his brethren immortal and ceaselessly happy. And thus in lifelong pursuit of this ideal which, when apprehended in the dialectical region, is necessarily the highest good, he will go on and rise out of the shadows and reflections of virtue to a fundamental knowledge of her, and will attain the light and cause his soul not to feign the vision of truth, but to see the truth itself.” 81 81 "Socrates, what do you mean? I would have you consider that the wordwhich you have uttered is one at which numerous persons, and veryrespectable persons too, in a figure pulling off their coats all ina moment, and seizing any weapon that comes to hand, will run at youmight and main, before you know where you are, intending to do heavenknows what; and if you don't prepare an answer, and put yourself inmotion, you will be prepared by their fine wits,' and no mistake. You got me into the scrape, I said. And I was quite right; however, I will do all I can to get you outof it; but I can only give you good-will and good advice, and, perhaps,I may be able to fit answers to your questions better than another--that is all. And now, having such an auxiliary, you must do yourbest to show the unbelievers that you are right. I ought to try, I said, since you offer me such invaluable assistance.And I think that, if there is to be a chance of our escaping, we mustexplain to them whom we mean when we say that philosophers are torule in the State; then we shall be able to defend ourselves: Therewill be discovered to be some natures who ought to study philosophyand to be leaders in the State; and others who are not born to bephilosophers, and are meant to be followers rather than leaders. @@ -2035,15 +2035,15 @@ Exactly. Once more let me ask: Does he who desires any class of goods, desirethe The whole. And may we not say of the philosopher that he is a lover, not of apart of wisdom only, but of the whole? Yes, of the whole. And he who dislikes learnings, especially in youth, when he has nopower of judging what is good and what is not, such an one we maintainnot to be a philosopher or a lover of knowledge, just as he who refuseshis food is not hungry, and may be said to have a bad appetite andnot a good one? Very true, he said. Whereas he who has a taste for every sort of knowledge and who iscurious to learn and is never satisfied, may be justly termed a philosopher?Am I not right?" "Summary: Socrates and his interlocutor discuss the nature of philosophers and their role in society. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonism +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, interlocutor -Time setting: Contemporary -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "There's only one type of philosopher, and that's the man who just can't take his own medicine. The kind of fellow who thinks he knows everything."""" Socrates took a long pull at his drink. """"I don't know where you're getting your ideas about philosophers,"""" he said finally. """"If you knew anything about them you'd know they have no use for their own brand of medicine; not any more than they have for yours or mine."""" The interlocutor snorted with disgust. He had never seen such a repulsive specimen of humanity as this bearded degenerate. How could anyone possibly talk so much nonsense? What was there about the man to make him think he was so smart? All he did was sit around all day talking to himself; then when some poor sucker came along he tried to bamboozle him into believing that he, Socrates, was a wise man! Well, he wasn't going to stand for it! Not by a damn sight! This was his case, and he wanted some answers. If this bum couldn't give them to him he'd better look for another place to hang out! The old philosopher didn't seem to notice the cold silence. After a moment he spoke again: I suppose you've been wondering why philosophers are always saying things that seem to make no sense."""" That's right!"" You might say they're always dropping hints. Or maybe you think they're crazy."""" Maybe."" That's because they're always looking for something. They're trying to find something out."""" I don't get it."" That's because you haven't been to school."" The interlocutor flushed. He hadn't intended to mention his education. But now that it was out he figured it was time for Socrates to spill some facts. """"How do you know I haven't?"""" he demanded. """"Maybe I have!"""" Oh, sure!"" the old man grinned. ""You probably went to Harvard. Now, I'll bet you took philosophy there, didn't you?"""" No,"" he admitted, ""I guess I didn't."" You see?"" Socrates nodded. ""It doesn't matter. Philosophy isn't taught in schools. You either have it or you don't."""" I don't think I have it."" Well, maybe you will after a while,"" the old man said. Then he leaned back on his stool and began to laugh. """"Maybe you won't!"""" * * * * * The two men sat silently, staring at each other. There were still questions to be answered, but suddenly the interlocutor found that he had lost interest in them. He didn't care whether Socrates had killed himself or not. He felt an almost overpowering urge to escape from this terrible room. The walls seemed to be closing in on him. And he hated the old man. He wondered if he should tell the police. " +Time setting: 1950s +Diegetic time: A few minutes" Socrates said, 'All right. You've got your answer. Now you can go to hell.' The interlocutor said, 'That's what I'm going to do. But first I'm going to tell you something else about philosophers. They're all like you. They're all crazy. And the reason they're all crazy is because they all want to be kings and emperors and gods instead of men. They all want to run everything in the world and make all the people happy. So if you ask me, Socrates, that's why all the smart guys are dead or in jail and the dumb guys are running things. Because the really smart guys were always trying to take over the whole world and make it over in their own image and likeness. And so they had to be killed off one by one until there weren't any more left except you. And now there isn't any more of you either. That's what I wanted to tell you, Socrates. Now I'm going to hell.' He went out and slammed the door behind him. Socrates got up and took his coat off the chair and put it on. Then he opened the window and looked down at the street. It was empty, but across the way he saw a man leaning against the wall, smoking a cigarette. Socrates watched him for a moment. He looked like a tough guy, and he looked like he was waiting for somebody. Socrates thought to himself, 'He's waiting for me,' and he smiled. Then he turned around and went back into the room and sat down again. After a while the bell rang. Socrates got up and went to the door and opened it. The tough-looking guy came in and closed the door behind him. He took a pack of cigarettes out of his pocket and offered one to Socrates. Socrates shook his head. The tough guy lit his cigarette and said, 'I guess you know who I am.' Socrates nodded. The tough guy said, 'Well, we've got to get moving fast. We've got to beat it out of town before daylight. Can you walk?' Socrates said, 'Yes.' The tough guy said, 'Okay. Let's go.' Socrates followed him out into the hall. They went downstairs and out onto the street. There was nobody in sight. The tough guy said, 'Stick close to me. We'll have to cut through some alleys.' They started walking. The tough guy said, 'I've got a car parked around the corner.' They turned the corner and walked another block. They turned another corner and stopped in front of a car. The tough guy opened the door and got in. Socrates got in after him. The tough guy started the engine and drove off. Socrates leaned back in the seat and closed his eyes. He didn't open them again until they stopped in front of a hotel. The tough guy said, 'This is where we get off.' They got out of the car and went into the hotel. In the lobby the tough guy said, 'You can stay here. I'll register you under my name.' 82 82 "Glaucon said: If curiosity makes a philosopher, you will find manya strange being will have a title to the name. All the lovers of sightshave a delight in learning, and must therefore be included. Musicalamateurs, too, are a folk strangely out of place among philosophers,for they are the last persons in the world who would come to anythinglike a philosophical discussion, if they could help, while they runabout at the Dionysiac festivals as if they had let out their earsto hear every chorus; whether the performance is in town or country--that makes no difference --they are there. Now are we to maintainthat all these and any who have similar tastes, as well as the professorsof quite minor arts, are philosophers? Certainly not, I replied; they are only an imitation. He said: Who then are the true philosophers? Those, I said, who are lovers of the vision of truth. That is also good, he said; but I should like to know what you mean? To another, I replied, I might have a difficulty in explaining; butI am sure that you will admit a proposition which I am about to make. @@ -2061,17 +2061,17 @@ Come, then, and let us think of something to say to him. Shall webegin by assuri I answer that he knows something. Something that is or is not? Something that is; for how can that which is not ever be known? And are we assured, after looking at the matter from many points ofview, that absolute being is or may be absolutely known, but thatthe utterly non-existent is utterly unknown?" "Summary: The text discusses the distinction between philosophers and those who are merely lovers of sight and art. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Glaucon, Socrates -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "I don't mean to be hardboiled about it, but when I hear a man who has the reputation of being a philosopher start off with such a proposition as that, I begin to have my doubts."""" You are quite right,"" said Glaucon. ""The distinction between philosophers and lovers of sight and art is quite as important as you suggest; only, perhaps, in another way from that which you mean. In your sense, the lover of wisdom is one who is satisfied with knowledge only so far as he goes, and not at all beyond. He does not aspire to the highest good. On the contrary, he is content with the knowledge which the artist gives him. He is merely a lover of the work of art, and the production of the poet is a work of art. The true philosopher, on the other hand, desires to go behind the mere productions of men's minds, and to learn what they are, and whence they come, and whither they go."""" Well,"" said Socrates, ""I think that we are very near to the truth now, and if any further light comes to me I shall be sure that I am treading in the path. Let us try to find out what the gods mean by saying that 'the eye cannot see itself,' and let us take an illustration from our own method of dealing with things. Do you remember how, at first, we were puzzled by the nature of number, and how, when we could not find out anything more about it, we decided to consider the number two?"""" Certainly."" And then we found that this number two was double one, and that the point which divides unity into duality was the cause of its being double?"""" True."" Now,"" continued Socrates, ""we may make use of this analogy in our present difficulty, and say that, whereas the soul is single, yet, because of a certain division or 'one over many,' as the mathematicians call it, she is many. This is what we mean when we say that there are many souls and one soul; for there are many souls in the same sense in which there are many twos, and one soul in the same sense in which there is one two."""" But,"" interrupted Glaucon, ""is not the two always equal to the two, and is not the one always equal to the one? How can there be many ones and many twos?"""" You are quite right,"" said Socrates; ""but have you ever heard the Pythagoreans discoursing about the nature of numbers?"""" Often."" Then you know that they divide them into odd and even, and that the even numbers are divisible into an infinite number of classes?"" Yes."" And do you understand the reason why they are called odd and even?"" " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "There was a great deal of this sort of thing in Glaucon's nature, and it had brought him into many an unpleasant situation. For instance, there was the time when he had been stopped by a policeman in the West End, and accused of being drunk and incapable. The officer had been astonished to find that Glaucon could not only walk straight but also recite long passages from Plato without a single slip. He had put down his offence as """"drunkenness"""" because Glaucon had refused to do the splits on the pavement, whereas any self-respecting Greek philosopher would have done them with pleasure. This evening, Glaucon was walking between Socrates and Polemarchus. As they approached their goal, Socrates halted abruptly. A few yards ahead of them was a tall figure, with one hand in his coat pocket and the other waving a stick. He looked like a man who was thinking things out in the open air, rather than a man who was loitering about suspiciously. His face was turned away, so that all they could see of him was his shoulders and the back of his head, which were covered by a thatch of untidy grey hair. He was humming a tune softly to himself. No!"" said Socrates sharply. ""Not that way."" And he led them round a side-street. I'm afraid he's gone,"" said Polemarchus. He has not gone,"" said Socrates. ""He is waiting for us."""" But why won't we go past him?"" asked Glaucon. Because,"" said Socrates, ""he is a detective, and I am going to let him detect me. I want you to see how he does it."""" But why should you want to be detected?"" Well,"" said Socrates, ""I always like to watch people doing what they are good at doing. And if you think about it, my dear Glaucon, you will realise that detectives are like painters. They are lovers of sight, just as painters are lovers of light; and the two classes are closely related."""" In what way?"" Because the lover of art and the lover of sight both belong to the same class of people as the lover of money. They are lovers of appearance, not of reality."""" Of course! How stupid of me!"" You are thinking now, I expect, of the merchant who goes into business for profit and yet dislikes making his accounts look untidy, or the man who gets rid of his wife because she is getting old and fat, but takes care to marry another woman who will look well beside her. Those are the cases where the love of appearances triumphs over the love of reality."""" But why are detectives and painters lovers of appearance?"" " 83 83 "Nothing can be more certain. Good. But if there be anything which is of such a nature as to beand not to be, that will have a place intermediate between pure beingand the absolute negation of being? Yes, between them. And, as knowledge corresponded to being and ignorance of necessityto not-being, for that intermediate between being and not-being therehas to be discovered a corresponding intermediate between ignoranceand knowledge, if there be such? Certainly. Do we admit the existence of opinion? Undoubtedly. As being the same with knowledge, or another faculty? Another faculty. Then opinion and knowledge have to do with different kinds of mattercorresponding to this difference of faculties? @@ -2098,16 +2098,16 @@ Not with either. And can therefore neither be ignorance nor knowledge? That seem In neither. Then I suppose that opinion appears to you to be darker than knowledge,but lighter than ignorance? Both; and in no small degree. And also to be within and between them? Yes. Then you would infer that opinion is intermediate? No question. But were we not saying before, that if anything appeared to be ofa sort which is and is not at the same time, that sort of thing wouldappear also to lie in the interval between pure being and absolutenot-being; and that the corresponding faculty is neither knowledgenor ignorance, but will be found in the interval between them? True. And in that interval there has now been discovered something whichwe call opinion?" "Summary: The text discusses the nature of knowledge, opinion, and being. -Enunciation: Third-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical argument -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Dialogue between two characters -Time setting: Contemporary -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "Aren't we all that?"""" I don't know,"" he said. ""I've got a hunch you ain't."""" What do you mean?"" I mean your trouble is you think too much, and you worry too much about being right. Maybe you ain't been wrong so often as you think you have. Being right's all very fine, but it ain't everything there is."""" He paused and lighted another cigarette. """"And what makes me so sure you ain't right? Well, let's see. You believe in knowledge, and you're right. But you won't admit there's anything else except knowledge, and you're not right about that. Knowledge is good, but it isn't enough. It's only the beginning of wisdom."""" That's what I always say!"" I interrupted him. ""That's just what I meant when I said """" Shut up,"" he said. ""You're getting off the track. I want to tell you what I mean. There are two kinds of people, the thinkers and the doers. The thinkers are the clever ones, the deep ones. They like to sit and figure things out and they get smart. And they think they know everything. But they don't. For one thing, they don't know how to use their brains."""" How?"" I asked, interested. ""How do you use them?"""" You can't teach that, any more than you can teach anybody to hit a baseball. It comes natural to some, and it doesn't to others. One of the guys that can use his brain is my partner, Sam Ransome, and he's just as dumb as a bag of hammers. He was a street car conductor before we got together."""" So was Philip Marlowe."" Sure, I know that now. But I didn't then. All I knew was I'd seen this tough guy around town for three or four years. He had a rep for knowing too damn much. He could take a single clue and work it into a dozen leads. But he never did any private investigating, so far as I knew. He wasn't even on the police force. He just seemed to be around. I figured he must be doing something pretty shady, so I didn't bother with him. Then I heard of him through an old buddy of mine who works for the D.A., and I called him up."""" Oh?"" I said. ""Why?"" Because I needed him,"" he said. ""He's plenty shrewd. Only he's stubborn."""" Is he?"" I said. ""I guess he is at that."""" Now look here,"" he said. ""What I'm trying to explain to you is this: If you're going to be wise, you got to have two things: knowledge and judgment. Knowledge is easy. Judgment is hard."""" I see,"" I said. ""It's sort of like being lucky. It has to come naturally."""" " +Time setting: 1950s +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "I am not asking you to believe me, but merely to realise that there is no such thing as knowledge in the absolute sense of the word. All we have are opinions. That is why I talk about being and not knowing. Knowing implies a certainty which does not exist in this world. If you like, I will admit that I know things with a greater degree of probability than you do. But I still say it is only opinion."""" He sat down on a low wooden stool, and smiled at her over his cigar. """"And now,"""" he said, """"I want to know something about you."""" She looked at him coldly and spoke without stirring from her chair. If you mean personal details, I don't see that they concern you."" It would be interesting."" I'm afraid you're rather too late for that. I told you when you first came here that I never tell people things about myself unless I feel inclined."""" You're very uncommunicative."" Perhaps, but not less so than yourself."" The corners of his mouth turned up in a grin. """"You must have known plenty about me before you asked me to come here."""" Yes, but I haven't been talking to anyone else for weeks."" She glanced at him suddenly, and saw that he was laughing silently. Her eyes flashed. """"What's the matter?"""" she asked sharply. Nothing. Only I can't help wondering what you're going to do if you ever get bored with keeping me here."""" I may find out."" He nodded. """"You've got spirit. I like that."" He picked up his cigar and stood up. """"By the way, what did you do with my clothes?"""" They're hanging up in the bedroom."" He walked towards the door and stopped at the threshold. """"Well,"""" he said, """"I'm going back now. I'll probably be along again tomorrow morning."""" He waited. There was no reply. He smiled. """"Good-bye, then,"""" he said. And went out of the room. As soon as the key turned in the lock she rose from her chair and walked quickly across to the window. When she reached it she stood looking down into the street. After a while she sighed and moved away. Then she sat down again by the table and took up the book. She read for some time and then laid it down once more. Presently she rose to her feet and walked slowly over to the fireplace. She stood leaning against the mantelpiece, thinking. At last she raised her head and stared fixedly at the opposite wall. A minute passed and still she continued to gaze steadily before her. Suddenly she turned round and hurried across to the door. She opened it and listened intently. There was silence. She crossed to the window and bent forward to look through the crack in the blind. The street was deserted. She withdrew her head and walked quickly across the room to the corner where the ladder led to the loft. " 84 84 "There has. Then what remains to be discovered is the object which partakes equallyof the nature of being and not-being, and cannot rightly be termedeither, pure and simple; this unknown term, when discovered, we maytruly call the subject of opinion, and assign each to its proper faculty,-the extremes to the faculties of the extremes and the mean to thefaculty of the mean. True. This being premised, I would ask the gentleman who is of opinion thatthere is no absolute or unchangeable idea of beauty --in whose opinionthe beautiful is the manifold --he, I say, your lover of beautifulsights, who cannot bear to be told that the beautiful is one, andthe just is one, or that anything is one --to him I would appeal,saying, Will you be so very kind, sir, as to tell us whether, of allthese beautiful things, there is one which will not be found ugly;or of the just, which will not be found unjust; or of the holy, whichwill not also be unholy? No, he replied; the beautiful will in some point of view be foundugly; and the same is true of the rest. @@ -2133,14 +2133,14 @@ And thus, Glaucon, after the argument has gone a weary way, the trueand the fals I do not think, he said, that the way could have been shortened." "Summary: The text discusses the nature of opinion and knowledge, arguing that what is perceived as beautiful or just is actually a combination of opposites. Trope: The dichotomy between appearance and reality Narrative arc: Philosophical argumentation -Enunciation: Dialog between Socrates and Glaucon -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical argument Active character: Socrates, Glaucon -Time setting: Contemporary" The fact is that what you call knowledge is merely opinion, and that the object of it, which you think can be apprehended by men, is mere appearance. [ 30 ] The truth about beauty is just as I have described it, though you may not like it. And the same is true of justice and health and good and evil. For each of them has its own opposite, and they are all relative to one another and in a state of transition. You see, then, how it is. That which is, is just becoming and passing away, and this process of coming into being and passing away the soul follows, wherever there is birth and death; but she herself is always in the same state. [ 35 ] And at her own proper seasons she gives birth to everything: she constrains herself to follow the course of compulsion which carries heaven and earth and sea; and because there is no life which remains always in one condition, there is neither any knowledge which always remains in the same state. So, Glaucon, my noble friend, do not after my death make me out a rogue by saying that I have anything fine or rare for you to hear about virtue; but rather, as I said at first, declare that these are all myths, which I invented to reply to Kharmides’ father and to you who were present there, that you might not believe that virtue can be taught. [ 40 ] For whether it can be taught or not, I cannot just yet say; but this much I am sure of, that the greatest help to it comes from music and poetry.” “And yet,” he said, “Socrates, I feel sure that you know how to answer this question.” “Yes, my friend,” I replied, “and I could answer it still better if I were not afraid of making people laugh.” “Why so?” he asked. “Because,” I answered, “I should have to tell how knowledge is acquired, and that would be an old story to them. For I fancy that they will have heard how it is that a man who cannot distinguish the lyre of Amphion, or discriminate between good and bad flute-players, will never become a good musician, unless he learns to know the difference between a good and a bad note. In like manner, if a man is ignorant of the beautiful and the ugly, will he recognize the beautiful when he sees it? It must, of course, be admitted that he will not. Again, if he does not know the nature of the just and the unjust, will he be able to recognize justice even if he were to see it? Clearly not. And if this is true, my dear friend, then clearly knowledge, and not persuasion, is required by those who wish to become just. [ 50 ] But let us proceed with our inquiry. +Time setting: 1950s" "Socrates is a much nicer guy than I am. He's more patient and he puts up with this kind of stuff from Glaucon, who is just a kid. I'm not sure why Socrates wants to listen to him at all."""" Why don't you just tell us what you think about the nature of opinion and knowledge,"" Glaucon said impatiently. """"I don't want to hear another lecture about your old teacher."""" Okay, okay,"" said Kaku. ""You're right, you're right. Let's get down to business."""" * * * * * Well, let me say first of all that whatever is perceived as beautiful or good or just, we must understand to be a combination of opposites. In other words, it's an illusion. It looks like something real but it isn't really there. This is the essence of my theory, which is borrowed in part from Socrates himself, though he never quite put it together the way I have."""" What do you mean?"" asked Glaucon. ""What is this theory of yours?"""" I'll explain,"" said Kaku. ""Let's take beauty for example. You see a woman and you find her attractive. Now you might think that this attractiveness comes from her physical appearance. But this is only half the story. The other half is hidden inside you. If you didn't have this feeling inside you, you wouldn't be attracted by her outward appearance. That's why beauty exists in the eye of the beholder. There is no such thing as absolute beauty; there are only relative beauties. And the same is true of justice and goodness and every other moral concept."""" So what you're saying is that these concepts aren't based on any objective reality,"" said Glaucon. ""They're just products of our own imagination."""" Exactly!"" said Kaku. ""And this is where my theory becomes interesting because it leads to a whole new way of understanding the world. It suggests that everything in the universe is ultimately an illusion."""" How can you possibly believe that?"" Glaucon exclaimed. ""Surely you must see that the world is full of real things. We can touch them and taste them and smell them. They exist whether we believe in them or not."""" Don't be so sure,"" said Kaku. ""In fact, I think you will agree with me when I say that a lot of things don't actually exist. Take money, for example. Is it real or is it just a piece of paper with some numbers printed on it?"""" But money has value,"" protested Glaucon. ""It represents something. It's worth something. You can buy things with it."""" Precisely!"" said Kaku. ""But what is it that gives money its value? It's nothing more than a symbol for something else. It's not the money itself that is valuable; it's what you can do with it. In other words, money is just a signifier of wealth, like a picture of a mountain is a signifier of a mountain."""" " 85 85 "I suppose not, I said; and yet I believe that we might have had abetter view of both of them if the discussion could have been confinedto this one subject and if there were not many other questions awaitingus, which he who desires to see in what respect the life of the justdiffers from that of the unjust must consider. And what is the next question? he asked. Surely, I said, the one which follows next in order. Inasmuch as philosophersonly are able to grasp the eternal and unchangeable, and those whowander in the region of the many and variable are not philosophers,I must ask you which of the two classes should be the rulers of ourState? And how can we rightly answer that question? Whichever of the two are best able to guard the laws and institutionsof our State --let them be our guardians. @@ -2159,13 +2159,13 @@ Right, he said. And is there anything more akin to wisdom than truth? How can th Never. The true lover of learning then must from his earliest youth, as faras in him lies, desire all truth? Assuredly. But then again, as we know by experience, he whose desires are strongin one direction will have them weaker in others; they will be likea stream which has been drawn off into another channel. True. He whose desires are drawn towards knowledge in every form will beabsorbed in the pleasures of the soul, and will hardly feel bodilypleasure --I mean, if he be a true philosopher and not a sham one." "Summary: The speaker discusses the qualities of philosophers and their ability to rule a state. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonism" "I am more and more convinced that the man who can make a good Socratic dialogue has had his education in the hardboiled school. The business of this conversation was to prove that philosophers, because they are philosophers, ought to be allowed to rule states. It will be seen that it is conducted in a rather raw fashion; but I don't want to suggest that it isn't a good argument."""" He paused for a moment with an air of conscious triumph, and then went on: And now we must get back to our cave again. We have been talking about things that are not, and soon the sun will be rising."""" As he spoke the light began to fade. That's right!"" said Glaucon. ""You have done just what you promised us. You've taken us from the world of shadows to the sunlit world, and now we shall go down into the cave again."""" Thrasymachus laughed as we stood up. What a fool you are, Socrates!"" he cried. ""Don't you know that when people are pleased with one another, they always tell each other stories?"""" " +Literary movement: Hardboiled" The philosophers have had their own way for a long time, and it has been a failure. They haven’t given us a decent Emperor yet. The day of the philosopher is over. We want men who can act, men who know what they want and are determined to get it. I’m not going to mince matters. These professors of yours are no damn good. They’re soft, sentimental, degenerate. They have no virility; they’ve never done a day’s work in their lives; they live on the fat of the land and dream dreams.” “Don’t interrupt me,” said Mr. Sinasdrusson, sharply. “I’m not through yet. You may think I’m a fool and that my opinions aren’t worth listening to, but I’ll tell you this: there are other people besides yourself who listen to me, and I am going to talk to them as well. If you think I’m going to let you get away with your nonsense without an answer, you’re mistaken. That’s all very well about the philosophers; but we won’t discuss them now. Let us leave them out of it, if you don’t mind. What I really wanted to say was something else entirely.” He paused. His face was red and he was breathing heavily. “What I really wanted to say was this: I am going to make you an offer. You will find it to your advantage to accept it. It’s a business proposition. You’ve heard what I’ve got to say; now I’ll hear what you’ve got to say. You can put your cards on the table now, or you can wait until tomorrow night.” “Very well,” said Vanamee. “I agree to your terms. I will put my cards on the table now.” “You’ve got a lot to learn about poker,” said Mr. Sinasdrusson. He lit another cigarette, and sat down. “Go ahead,” he said, “I’m listening.” Vanamee leaned back in his chair and clasped his hands across his knees. For several moments he sat looking at the millionaire. Then he began to speak. “You have heard what I had to say,” he began. “Now I would like to ask you some questions. In the first place, why did you come here?” “That’s none of your business,” replied Mr. Sinasdrusson. “It’s all right,” said Vanamee. “I understand. But it happens that it is my business. You came here because you were afraid.” “Afraid!” cried Mr. Sinasdrusson. “I! Of what?” “Of someone named Vanamee,” said the professor, quietly. Mr. Sinasdrusson glared at him suspiciously. “How do you know anything about that?” he demanded. “I guessed it,” said Vanamee. “I knew that you had something to conceal from me, and so I concluded that you had come here because you were afraid of someone whom you thought I might ask about. 86 86 "That is most certain. Such an one is sure to be temperate and the reverse of covetous; forthe motives which make another man desirous of having and spending,have no place in his character. Very true. Another criterion of the philosophical nature has also to be considered. What is that? There should be no secret corner of illiberality; nothing can moreantagonistic than meanness to a soul which is ever longing after thewhole of things both divine and human. @@ -2189,30 +2189,30 @@ Here Adeimantus interposed and said: To these statements, Socrates,no one can of Well, and do you think that those who say so are wrong? I cannot tell, he replied; but I should like to know what is youropinion. Hear my answer; I am of opinion that they are quite right." "Summary: The text discusses the characteristics of a philosophical nature and argues that those who pursue philosophy become useless to society. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog between Socrates and Adeimantus -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, Adeimantus -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s Fuzzy place: Unnamed location -Diegetic time: A few minutes" O sois fraco, no sabeis que o caracter da natureza philosophica e esse de querer tudo sabendo e nada fazendo; e que todos os que andam em busca da verdade se tornam inuteis para a sociedade, por serem incapazes de qualquer outra occupao. E isto nao acontece apenas com elles? No julgais vossos filhos mais aptos para fazerem mil coisas do que os outros meninos? Sim. Ento no vos espanteis: o mesmo caracter se vai manifestando com a idade. Adeimantus O que me espanta e que as pessoas de bem te tratem com tanto respeito. Socrates Porque eu sou um homem honesto e reto: como tal, ninguem me teme; mas todos me respeitam, porque conheo a verdade e sou um bom conselheiro. Adeimantus N'isto fallas como Pherecydes, o pitagorico, que dizia ter aprendido todas as cousas com Jove. Socrates Podes crer que Pherecydes era um homem honrado e um excellent conselheiro. Adeimantus Mas c que dizer de Platonicos? Socrates Bem, creio que esses homens sao uns ladrões e mentirosos, e eu, ao passar pela rua, troco sempre palavras agrestes com elles. Adeimantus Que! com esses to poderosos e ricos?... Com medo deles?! Socrates Medo! Eu!... Nunca o vi nem o verei; quanto medo, no tenho nada commigo. Adeimantus Como! e tu recusas-te a aceitar as generosas offertas de tantos protectores? Não fao caso das offertas, nem dos protectores. Adeimantus E quando elles te foram procurar, e te chamaram seu mestre, e te convidaram a acompanhar-os a casa, para que estavas tu comtudo a esmurrar-lhes a porta? Socrates Olha, Adeimanto, essa historia e do gosto meu, e vou-te dar uma explicao que te far rir. Eis aqui uma scena que representei muitas vezes na minha imaginao; e estou certo de que ella se repete ainda hoje em dia entre os philosophos e os homens politicos. Suppo que um homem politico, possuidor de grandes riquezas e de muito poder, venha a mim e me diga: Amigo Socrates, queres acompanharmo-me a casa? Eu respondo: Sim, senhor; com prazer. Ele continua: Vamos, segue-me. Eu seguo-o, e metteo a dobrar o caminho, para ir ao outro extremo da cidade, passando pelas ruinas do templo de Saturno e pelos muros desmoronados. Chegando ao fim da cidade, entra na sua casa, e, tomando-me pela m, diz-me: Aqui tens a tua parte; podes ir-te embora, que estes thres logariscos (philosophoi) esto aqui para ti. Com effeito, ha tres homens velhos que elle me introduz na sala, e depois me diz: Aqui tens a tua escola; agora fica-te comm'elles. Eu ento alvoroo o melhor modo que posso e digo: Senhor, vossa bondade e liberalidade me surpreendem; mas pece-me que no posso ficar comm'esses tres homens; preciso dos seus livros. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "It's a philosophical nature. It wants to know what it's living for, and why. And the longer you live the more you realize that nothing is worth being excited about, and that there isn't any point in anything."""" Socrates smiled. """"That's true of everybody but me,"""" he said. Well, I was just wondering if we could work out a way to convey that idea to all the young people coming along. They're so damn' eager to get started, poor kids. They're like race horses at the post."""" The old man nodded his head. """"I've thought of that,"""" he said. """"The trouble is that they can't stand not doing things. A man who really knows what life is all about doesn't have to do anything. He can stay home and eat chocolate ice cream. But the young fellow with a philosophy degree is different. His whole idea is to be busy. That's what makes him so hard to handle. If you try to explain to him that life is a fraud, he won't listen to you; he'll say 'How can you tell unless you've tried everything?' """" Adeimantus looked up from his drink. """"You've got something there,"""" he said. """"Maybe we could make him think he had tried everything. Maybe we could make him realize that there's no satisfaction in anything. Make him tired of trying."""" That's right,"" said Socrates. ""That would be fine. But how are we going to do it?"""" Well, here's one way,"" said Adeimantus. ""Make him a detective."" Socrates smiled. """"That might work,"""" he said. """"Yes, that might do it. Of course, it wouldn't do if he had any sense of humor, but most detectives don't have any sense of humor. They're pretty dull fellows. All they care about is getting their man. How did you come to think of that, Adeimantus?"""" Well, sir, I saw it in a movie. Hitchcock, wasn't it? About spies. There was a detective on the trail of some gang of crooks, and every time he found a clue it made him mad, and he'd go around smashing things up."""" Yes, I remember,"" said Socrates. ""And the funny thing was that he didn't find out anything. That might be the way to do it. Make them mad enough, and they'll tear their hair out."""" I guess so,"" said Adeimantus. ""But I don't see how we can make the world full of detectives without anybody finding out about it."""" We don't want them to find out about it,"" said Socrates. ""That's the beauty of it. You see, Adeimantus, it has to be done slowly, gradually. We don't want to change the surface of things too much. Just make the young fellows crazy inside, so they'll want to bust things up and smash things down. " 87 87 "Then how can you be justified in saying that cities will not ceasefrom evil until philosophers rule in them, when philosophers are acknowledgedby us to be of no use to them? You ask a question, I said, to which a reply can only be given ina parable. Yes, Socrates; and that is a way of speaking to which you are notat all accustomed, I suppose. I perceive, I said, that you are vastly amused at having plunged meinto such a hopeless discussion; but now hear the parable, and thenyou will be still more amused at the meagreness of my imagination:for the manner in which the best men are treated in their own Statesis so grievous that no single thing on earth is comparable to it;and therefore, if I am to plead their cause, I must have recourseto fiction, and put together a figure made up of many things, likethe fabulous unions of goats and stags which are found in pictures.Imagine then a fleet or a ship in which there is a captain who istaller and stronger than any of the crew, but he is a little deafand has a similar infirmity in sight, and his knowledge of navigationis not much better. The sailors are quarrelling with one another aboutthe steering --every one is of opinion that he has a right to steer,though he has never learned the art of navigation and cannot tellwho taught him or when he learned, and will further assert that itcannot be taught, and they are ready to cut in pieces any one whosays the contrary. They throng about the captain, begging and prayinghim to commit the helm to them; and if at any time they do not prevail,but others are preferred to them, they kill the others or throw themoverboard, and having first chained up the noble captain's senseswith drink or some narcotic drug, they mutiny and take possessionof the ship and make free with the stores; thus, eating and drinking,they proceed on their voyage in such a manner as might be expectedof them. Him who is their partisan and cleverly aids them in theirplot for getting the ship out of the captain's hands into their ownwhether by force or persuasion, they compliment with the name of sailor,pilot, able seaman, and abuse the other sort of man, whom they calla good-for-nothing; but that the true pilot must pay attention tothe year and seasons and sky and stars and winds, and whatever elsebelongs to his art, if he intends to be really qualified for the commandof a ship, and that he must and will be the steerer, whether otherpeople like or not-the possibility of this union of authority withthe steerer's art has never seriously entered into their thoughtsor been made part of their calling. Now in vessels which are in astate of mutiny and by sailors who are mutineers, how will the truepilot be regarded? Will he not be called by them a prater, a star-gazer,a good-for-nothing? Of course, said Adeimantus. Then you will hardly need, I said, to hear the interpretation of thefigure, which describes the true philosopher in his relation to theState; for you understand already. Certainly. Then suppose you now take this parable to the gentleman who is surprisedat finding that philosophers have no honour in their cities; explainit to him and try to convince him that their having honour would befar more extraordinary." "Summary: The speaker discusses the role of philosophers in society and compares it to a ship captain and sailors. -Enunciation: First-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Dialogue -Active character: Socrates, Adeimantus" "It was a ship, wasn't it?"""" Socrates smiled and said: """"Yes, it was a ship."""" Well then,"" I said, ""if your philosophers are like sailors on a ship, what do you think their job is?"""" There's no need to be hardboiled about this,"" he said. ""I've never met any philosophy that was much use in practice, but I know what they're supposed to do. They're supposed to steer the ship."""" That's what I thought."" I took a sip of my ouzo and went on: """"So suppose you have a captain and some sailors, and the captain is steering the ship. What happens to the sailors?"""" We sit down and let him steer,"" Adeimantus said. He looked at me in a puzzled way. The Greeks don't find that as funny as we do. But if there are a lot of passengers on board,"" I said, ""what do they do?"""" They'll sit down too, of course,"" he said. ""Why not?"" Because they want to take the wheel off the captain and steer the ship themselves."" Why would they want to do that?"" So they can show us how good they are."" But they aren't seamen,"" he said. ""They couldn't possibly steer the ship."" Of course they could. They just wouldn't know where they were going. They'd make a mess of it, but so would the captain. So all they can do is to try to bring the ship to a halt."""" But why should they want to do that?"" To get rid of the captain. And then they'd vote for somebody else."" Are you mad?"" he said. ""Who would want to get rid of the captain?"" Everybody who didn't get his own way. Look here,"" I said, ""this isn't a serious conversation. It's just to amuse ourselves. Don't take it seriously."""" But I am taking it seriously,"" he said. ""This is the sort of thing that happens when people don't believe in gods. They don't behave rationally; they behave irrationally."""" Look here,"" I said. ""If you don't like these little games, why don't you go back to Athens? You won't be able to stop people from talking like this, so why worry about it?"""" He shook his head and said: """"It isn't a matter of worrying about it, it's a matter of understanding it."""" Then tell me how you understand it. Do you really believe that people don't want to steer their own ships?"""" Of course they do,"" he said. ""But they don't know how to steer them. They think they do, but they don't."""" If they don't know how to steer, how do they know where they're going?"" They don't,"" he said. ""That's why they want to get rid of the captain."""" " +Active character: Socrates, Adeimantus" What good can philosophers do to the ship, and what is their use in it? Are they not a mere incumbrance and useless piece of cargo? For why, instead of having one pilot in the ship, should you not have two or more, and would that not be best of all? Or if there ought to be only one, on the same principle he ought to be single ruler in the state also. And instead of having many sailors, you might as well have only one, and so have one less out of your pay. But now, because the sailors are many the sailors quarrel with each other; at times they even rise in insurrection and offer battle to the captain; and when they have taken the kingdom from him, and slain him, and have done away with the rule of the one, then the good men, who remain behind in the city, are at war with one another.” “Why is that, Socrates?” “Why, because they are not like ourselves, but are a sort of people who live after their own evil dreams; and who care less for the true happiness of the city than for their own temporary repose; and they have no sense. They will make you a feast, and invite you to be their guest; they will honour you with statues and temples, and give titles to you and their children; they will flatter you and their other favourites; but if any of you says to them: ‘My dear friends, how brave and just and true were the ancients,’ they are offended and will let you have nothing to eat. ‘Surely,’ they will say, ‘the blessings of the present are better than the curses of the past. At that time there was danger and envy and sedition, wherefore we are not only wiser, but also happier.’” “Yes,” he said, “they are apt to talk like that.” “Wherefore,” I replied, “my dear friend, those who have the government of a city have a hard task at which they must laugh or cry, and are themselves and seen of men in a pitiable condition.” “The task, then,” said Adeimantus, “is worthy of the wisest of men.” “But surely,” he said, “there must be some one who has, or who could naturally have, the greatest wisdom.” “You mean,” I replied, “some wise man who is also a good man?” “Yes,” he said; “these are my means of arriving at the truth.” “I thought that you were going to say that he who had most power.” “And, as I was saying, Adeimantus, the person who has the greatest power is not always the wisest. For often, when the true ruler requires wisdom and goodness, the citizens choose a worthless rogue who is a runner or a wrestler, because he has greater power.” “Yes,” he said, “that is often the way.” 88 88 "I will. Say to him, that, in deeming the best votaries of philosophy to beuseless to the rest of the world, he is right; but also tell him toattribute their uselessness to the fault of those who will not usethem, and not to themselves. The pilot should not humbly beg the sailorsto be commanded by him --that is not the order of nature; neitherare 'the wise to go to the doors of the rich' --the ingenious authorof this saying told a lie --but the truth is, that, when a man isill, whether he be rich or poor, to the physician he must go, andhe who wants to be governed, to him who is able to govern. The rulerwho is good for anything ought not to beg his subjects to be ruledby him; although the present governors of mankind are of a differentstamp; they may be justly compared to the mutinous sailors, and thetrue helmsmen to those who are called by them good-for-nothings andstar-gazers. Precisely so, he said. For these reasons, and among men like these, philosophy, the noblestpursuit of all, is not likely to be much esteemed by those of theopposite faction; not that the greatest and most lasting injury isdone to her by her opponents, but by her own professing followers,the same of whom you suppose the accuser to say, that the greaternumber of them are arrant rogues, and the best are useless; in whichopinion I agreed. Yes. And the reason why the good are useless has now been explained? @@ -2230,13 +2230,13 @@ What are these corruptions? he said. I will see if I can explain them to you. Ev Rare indeed. And what numberless and powerful causes tend to destroy these rarenatures! What causes? In the first place there are their own virtues, their courage, temperance,and the rest of them, every one of which praise worthy qualities (andthis is a most singular circumstance) destroys and distracts fromphilosophy the soul which is the possessor of them." "Summary: The text discusses the nature of philosophy and the characteristics of philosophers. Narrative arc: Philosophical exploration and discussion -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonism" "Philosophy is the science of sciences, and its subject matter is the nature of all things. It is a kind of geometry of the universe; it seeks to calculate what God's mind must have done in order to produce this world."""" And what would you say was the nature of all things?"""" said the girl. That is the chief problem of philosophy,"" he said. ""I do not know the answer yet, but I am trying to find it."""" A hard job,"" she said. Well, there are over two thousand years of mistakes to clear up before you can start afresh,"" he answered. """"The first men who tried to solve the problems were, on the whole, idiots. Most philosophers since then have been lunatics. But some of them have been very wise men indeed."""" Who were the wisest?"" Socrates,"" said the detective. ""And Plato."" I thought so!"" exclaimed Miss Hurlbird. Why did you think so?"" Because they were both beautiful."" Well, that is true enough,"" he said. ""But it is only one of their virtues."" What was the other virtue?"" You may read about it in Plato's 'Symposium.' Perhaps some day I will tell you about it myself."" She looked at him for a moment with half-closed eyes, then said: """"Well, Mr. Beresford, if we're going to talk philosophy, perhaps you'd better take off your coat. It makes me nervous to see you looking like a private eye."""" He took off his coat and sat down by the fire. The little red lamp made a pool of flame-colored light on the rug in front of him, and the firelight threw curious shadows across the room. It was very peaceful. All the noises outside seemed very far away, and inside the house there was hardly any sound at all except the crackling of the logs and the ticking of the clock. They sat for a while without speaking, and then the girl turned towards him and said: I never met a real philosopher before. I suppose you don't really know anything about girls."""" I suppose I don't,"" he said, smiling. If you don't mind, I'm going to ask you questions just as much as you asked me. Don't be offended if they are rude ones. I want to find out what sort of a man you are."""" Well, fire away,"" he said. Do you believe in Greek gods?"" he said. Yes,"" he said. ""What else could you believe in? They were the best gods we ever had."""" Isn't it rather silly?"" she said. No,"" he said. ""It is perfectly reasonable to believe in the Greek gods. It is just as reasonable to believe in Santa Claus."""" What nonsense!"" she said. ""Santa Claus isn't reasonable. He's an idea. He's an ideal."""" Precisely,"" he said. ""So are the Greek gods. An ideal is either an idea or a person. When an ideal is a person, you call him a god."""" Well, but they weren't persons. They were only symbols."""" " +Literary movement: Hardboiled" "It is true that the subject of philosophy is very wide and deep, but I am not sure that it has to be so. The point is that you don't have to know everything in order to have an opinion about something. For example, you might not know all the mathematics in the world and yet you might be able to decide if one mathematical problem is easier or harder than another one. You might not know all the music in the world, but you might be able to tell whether a particular piece of music is harmonious or not. Philosophy is like that. In fact, philosophy is simply asking questions about things. And just as there are people who understand mathematics and music better than other people, there are people who are better at asking questions than other people. So you can also talk about them having a special talent for philosophy."""" In any case,"" said Mr. Hastings, ""I think we ought to be grateful to Mr. Bultitude for his kindness in providing us with this opportunity of discussing our problems."""" That reminds me,"" said Miss Marple, ""of another question that has been troubling me. Why did Mr. Bultitude suddenly turn on Mr. Ransom?"""" It's difficult to say,"" said Tommy. ""He was probably getting rather bored with him. He didn't seem to want to get rid of him, though, because he let him go when he had time to catch up with us."""" Yes, that's odd."" There was a pause, then Mr. Hastings said, """"Do you remember how hard it was to make Mr. Ransom answer questions? He seemed to be stonewalling all the time. It must have taken Hercule Poirot a long time to get anything out of him."""" I wondered why he didn't try to escape from us,"" said Miss Marple. Tommy shook his head. """"I don't think he could have done it. He was a big man and he'd hurt himself badly climbing down the wall. Besides, he had that revolver. He couldn't have got away without being noticed."""" But he had escaped once before?"" Yes, but it was while he was unconscious. And he couldn't do it again unless he had the same luck twice running. Well, what else is there?"""" What about Miss Russell?"" asked Mr. Hastings. ""She told us that she went to bed quite early and that she heard nothing until morning. She seems to have slept soundly all through the night. Does that mean anything?"""" Not necessarily,"" said Tommy. ""It would only prove that she hadn't been drugged. Or that she was given a drug that didn't affect her."""" Yes, I suppose that's possible,"" said Mr. Hastings. ""She doesn't look as if she were easily affected by drugs."" Tommy looked at him curiously. """"What do you mean by that?"""" Mr. Hastings flushed. """"Well,"""" he said, """"she does strike me as being a rather formidable character. " 89 89 "That is very singular, he replied. Then there are all the ordinary goods of life --beauty, wealth, strength,rank, and great connections in the State --you understand the sortof things --these also have a corrupting and distracting effect. I understand; but I should like to know more precisely what you meanabout them. Grasp the truth as a whole, I said, and in the right way; you willthen have no difficulty in apprehending the preceding remarks, andthey will no longer appear strange to you. @@ -2251,15 +2251,15 @@ Indeed they do; and in right good earnest. Now what opinion of any other Sophist None, he replied. No, indeed, I said, even to make the attempt is a great piece of folly;there neither is, nor has been, nor is ever likely to be, any differenttype of character which has had no other training in virtue but thatwhich is supplied by public opinion --I speak, my friend, of humanvirtue only; what is more than human, as the proverb says, is notincluded: for I would not have you ignorant that, in the present evilstate of governments, whatever is saved and comes to good is savedby the power of God, as we may truly say. I quite assent, he replied. Then let me crave your assent also to a further observation." "Summary: The text discusses the corrupting influence of certain goods and how they can lead to evil. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters, Socrates and Adeimantus -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Plato's dialogues +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, Adeimantus -Time setting: Contemporary" Why, if you like to call them so, I said; but I should have thought “necessary” a better name. Adeimantus said with a smile: “Yes, Socrates, if you were only allowed to talk about necessary goods and not about necessary evils!” Do you mean,” I said, “that there are necessary evils?” “Certainly,” he replied; “for example, the being in pain is an evil, and yet necessary; and virtue, as we admit—now virtue is far from being always pleasant—you will not dispute that?” No, by heaven,” I said; “and why need you mention that? For the being sick is also inevitable.” I do not think that you see the difference very quickly,” he said; “but when you do you will find that there is a difference between foods which tend to make people brave and healthy, and those which tend rather to produce cowards and weaklings.” There would certainly be no difficulty in seeing that,” I replied; “and I too thought just now that the word might perhaps be improperly used when I said that all goods are necessary for mankind.” And for beasts?” said he. And for all animals generally,” I replied. Yes, for all,” he said. “And therefore,” I said, “we must either say that there are necessary evils, or that these are not good; for if these are good, there will be no necessary evils.” True,” he replied; “and I think that there will be as many necessary evils as there are necessary goods, and no more.” I agreed. Then come,” he said, “to the point and tell me, what are these necessary goods which are to our souls as iron or silver is to the body, of which you said just now that without them nothing can grow or be well off?” First of all, I said, here are rulers of states never failing necessities; and, secondly, the art of using the guardians who are to be set over subjects, whether they are to be husbands or wives, artisans or soldiers, which I suspect to be a long and difficult matter?” Why?” said he. Do you think,” I said, “that in a state which is governed by the right method, where the rulers who hold office are the best of the citizens, and who have been taken from the class which the previous generation deem to be superior, where the next in order happen to be those of comparable worth, and the rest in proportion—and this is the way in which every state ought to be ordered—will such a state ever fall into disorder at any point?” Hardly, my friend,” he said. Why then,” I said, “should we not say that this is the most truly necessary of all the goods which we have mentioned, and the greatest evil the reverse of this, when a state becomes divided into two, and different persons having opposite interests rule over the same land, some making war and others peace, some introducing and others banishing the arts, and some priding themselves on their love of wisdom instead of honouring those who are really wise?” +Time setting: 1950s" It’s the same with certain books. They can’t help corrupting you. I’ll tell you a true story of how it happened to me. In my youth, before I had seen the light, I was fond of stories, and so I used to read novels. One day, in a public library, I came across a book that really interested me. It was called ‘Gone With The Wind’. It was about a man who was absolutely without any moral character whatever. He murdered people and stole their goods. And he did it without feeling at all bad about it, either! If he felt bad about anything, it was only about having to take risks or do hard work. But then, whenever he got hold of some money, he’d go out and buy himself the most expensive clothes and jewellery, and go round showing them off to every woman he met! It made me sick just thinking of it! Well, I bought the book and took it home to read it again. And when I did, it seemed to cast a spell over me. I couldn’t get it out of my mind. It was as if there were something wrong with it; but what it was I couldn’t say. Then one night, after I’d been reading it for a week, I woke up in the middle of the night and found myself sitting bolt upright in bed. My whole body was shaking, and I thought I was going to die! And then, as I sat there, I heard a voice coming from the darkness around me. ‘Socrates,’ it said, ‘you are a fool.’ ‘Who is speaking?’ I cried. ‘It’s your inner daemon,’ it replied. ‘Your daemon is telling you that you must give up this book immediately. You must put it away where you can’t see it, and never look at it again.’ So I leapt out of bed and ran downstairs to find Adeimantus. I gave him the book and told him what had happened. And from that day to this, I’ve never touched another novel!” “I’m glad to hear it,” said Adeimantus, “because I wouldn’t want to be responsible for your death.” “You’re right,” said Socrates. “But now that we’ve cleared up that little matter, let’s get back to the subject of virtue. We were talking about the goods of fortune. Now, it’s obvious that these goods can lead to evil. If you have an abundance of them, you may become arrogant and ungrateful towards the Gods. You may also develop vicious habits, such as gambling and gluttony, because you have no need to work for your living. And if you lose your goods through misfortune, you may become envious of those who have retained theirs. Or you may even turn to crime in order to get them back! 90 90 "What are you going to say? Why, that all those mercenary individuals, whom the many call Sophistsand whom they deem to be their adversaries, do, in fact, teach nothingbut the opinion of the many, that is to say, the opinions of theirassemblies; and this is their wisdom. I might compare them to a manwho should study the tempers and desires of a mighty strong beastwho is fed by him-he would learn how to approach and handle him, alsoat what times and from what causes he is dangerous or the reverse,and what is the meaning of his several cries, and by what sounds,when another utters them, he is soothed or infuriated; and you maysuppose further, that when, by continually attending upon him, hehas become perfect in all this, he calls his knowledge wisdom, andmakes of it a system or art, which he proceeds to teach, althoughhe has no real notion of what he means by the principles or passionsof which he is speaking, but calls this honourable and that dishonourable,or good or evil, or just or unjust, all in accordance with the tastesand tempers of the great brute. Good he pronounces to be that in whichthe beast delights and evil to be that which he dislikes; and he cangive no other account of them except that the just and noble are thenecessary, having never himself seen, and having no power of explainingto others the nature of either, or the difference between them, whichis immense. By heaven, would not such an one be a rare educator? Indeed, he would. And in what way does he who thinks that wisdom is the discernmentof the tempers and tastes of the motley multitude, whether in paintingor music, or, finally, in politics, differ from him whom I have beendescribing For when a man consorts with the many, and exhibits tothem his poem or other work of art or the service which he has donethe State, making them his judges when he is not obliged, the so-callednecessity of Diomede will oblige him to produce whatever they praise.And yet the reasons are utterly ludicrous which they give in confirmationof their own notions about the honourable and good. Did you ever hearany of them which were not? No, nor am I likely to hear. You recognise the truth of what I have been saying? Then let me askyou to consider further whether the world will ever be induced tobelieve in the existence of absolute beauty rather than of the manybeautiful, or of the absolute in each kind rather than of the manyin each kind? @@ -2272,15 +2272,15 @@ No question. Falling at his feet, they will make requests to him and do him hono That often happens, he said. And what will a man such as he be likely to do under such circumstances,especially if he be a citizen of a great city, rich and noble, anda tall proper youth? Will he not be full of boundless aspirations,and fancy himself able to manage the affairs of Hellenes and of barbarians,and having got such notions into his head will he not dilate and elevatehimself in the fulness of vain pomp and senseless pride? To be sure he will. Now, when he is in this state of mind, if some one gently comes tohim and tells him that he is a fool and must get understanding, whichcan only be got by slaving for it, do you think that, under such adversecircumstances, he will be easily induced to listen?" "Summary: The text discusses the teachings of sophists and the conflict between the opinions of the many and the wisdom of the philosopher. Trope: The conflict between wisdom and popular opinion -Enunciation: Third-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Dialogue -Literary movement: Plato's writings are considered part of the Classical period of Ancient Greek literature +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Mercenary individuals, philosophers -Time setting: Contemporary" "The mercenary sophists are the new generation of Sirens, who ply their craft in modern dress. They chant seductive songs that lead men to wreck and ruin."""" The idea struck me as rather hardboiled,"" I confessed, ""and I wondered if Plato would have taken the same view of a certain class of women whom he obviously admired."""" He smiled. """"I am afraid you have not read all of Plato's writings,"""" he said. """"He was certainly no prude. But let us return to our problem. What can we learn from this passage?"""" That your own wisdom is very much at war with the opinions of the many,"""" I suggested. His face lit up. """"Quite so! A most illuminating comment. You see, my friend, this conflict between the opinions of the many and the wisdom of the philosopher is the central theme of all the dialogues. It is the very heart of Plato's teaching. If we apply his ideas to our own situation we shall soon perceive that it is only by cultivating our individual judgment that we shall be able to solve this case."""" I nodded sympathetically but remained silent. After all, what had I to contribute to this conversation? I was an amateur sleuth and my knowledge of philosophy was limited to a few quotations from Oscar Wilde. * * * * * We lunched at the club and afterwards adjourned to the library. Here, seated comfortably before the fire, we sipped our drinks and began to talk. The Professor opened the conversation by discussing the difference between knowing and believing. In his opinion it was more important to believe in something than to know about it. " +Time setting: 1950s" They’re all out there. Mercenary individuals selling the wisdom of the Sophists for a few dollars a week. And you can’t blame them, but don’t waste your time on them, they’ll only take up your money.” “But I didn’t hire you to philosophize,” said the man in the white suit. “I want to know about this woman.” “The truth is, my friend, that you don’t know what you want. You think you want to know about her because you are angry and shocked at having been deceived. But if you knew the truth, would you be any happier? Remember that philosophers have known the truth for two thousand years, and they have never been happy. Happiness is the privilege of fools. ” The man in the white suit shrank back in his chair. “I haven’t come here for happiness,” he said. “I’ve come for revenge.” “There’s no point in revenge either,” said the detective. “Revenge belongs to savages. Revenge is the luxury of those who feel themselves safe. When you are alone in a wild country you may kill your enemy, but when you live in cities and you hear nothing but talk of war, revenge is merely an illusion. Remember, too, that in a city it is always the innocent who suffer most. If you kill your enemy you will find another enemy and you will probably kill him too, but remember also that in killing him you may also kill your son or your daughter, for they are your enemies’ sons and daughters too.” “That’s enough,” said the man in the white suit. “I’m not interested in philosophy.” “All right, then,” said the detective, “let’s go back to the facts. What were these facts? You had a wife, she left you. Why did she leave you?” “She was unfaithful to me.” “Did you love her very much?” “Yes, I loved her.” “Why did you love her?” “Because she was beautiful and gentle and she made me happy.” “And when she left you and became ugly and cruel and made you unhappy, why did you still love her?” “I still love her.” “And do you love her now that you know she has become a thief and a prostitute?” “No.” “Do you still want to kill her?” “Certainly not.” “Then why did you send for me?” “To prove that she’s a thief and a prostitute.” “Well, you have proved it, so what next?” “What do you mean, what next?” “Is there anything else you want to prove?” “Of course there is.” “And if you prove it, what then?” “Then I shall go away and forget about it.” “All right, let’s see what we can do.” The detective pulled a folder out of his pocket and began reading from it: “This woman, as you already know, was born in Athens. Her mother was a Greek and her father was a German. She was brought up by her mother until the age of twelve, when she was sent to school in Germany. 91 91 "Far otherwise. And even if there be some one who through inherent goodness or naturalreasonableness has had his eyes opened a little and is humbled andtaken captive by philosophy, how will his friends behave when theythink that they are likely to lose the advantage which they were hopingto reap from his companionship? Will they not do and say anythingto prevent him from yielding to his better nature and to render histeacher powerless, using to this end private intrigues as well aspublic prosecutions? There can be no doubt of it. And how can one who is thus circumstanced ever become a philosopher? Impossible. Then were we not right in saying that even the very qualities whichmake a man a philosopher may, if he be ill-educated, divert him fromphilosophy, no less than riches and their accompaniments and the otherso-called goods of life? @@ -2291,17 +2291,17 @@ Yes. Are they not exactly like a bald little tinker who has just got outof duran A most exact parallel. What will be the issue of such marriages? Will they not be vile andbastard? There can be no question of it. And when persons who are unworthy of education approach philosophyand make an alliance with her who is a rank above them what sort ofideas and opinions are likely to be generated? Will they not be sophismscaptivating to the ear, having nothing in them genuine, or worthyof or akin to true wisdom?" "Summary: The text discusses the challenges faced by philosophers in society and the negative effects that their pursuit of knowledge can have on their personal relationships. Narrative arc: Philosophical reflection -Enunciation: Third-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Dialogue -Literary movement: Enlightenment +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Philosophers, friends, teachers -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s Fuzzy place: Unnamed locations within a city or state -Diegetic time: A few minutes" And philosophers, when they came to be listened to and admired by the young men of the State, had no longer any occasion for their friends ; for the disciples were now their friends, and took them home to live with them. And thus arose a new sort of ambition in the state, an ambition which was only an imitation of the ambition of the rulers. And so you see, he said, that our philosophy has taken no harm at the hands of our modern politicians. And even if those who are chargeable with making it a cause of strife and division in the state should prove to be right, what difference does that make ? If men with any intelligence may be allowed to go about among honest men speaking of higher things with true knowledge of them, may not many whom the world calls mad, or who are really mad, go about among them speaking of higher things with false knowledge, and persuade them to do foolish actions, and so become dangerous and unhappy ? Yes, he said, there may be some danger ; let us then consider whether there is any safe way of detecting the false prophets from the true. Why, yes, I said ; and there is a very good way. Tell me, then, I said, whether this cannot be done, as follows ? The nature of the virtuous city and man appears to have been illustrated quite as far as the plan of this work allows. There remain to be considered two points. One is the preservation of the virtue of the State, the other the preservation of the unity of the ruling element. Suppose, then, that God has been pleased to implant in our natures desire for enjoyment, memory, anticipation, reasoning power, love, and a host of other particulars of which I will not speak ; and that he has imposed upon us certain conditions, without the fulfilment of which our existence would be hopeless and useless : want of motion, intemperature, intemperance, cowardice, meanness, ingratitude, and the like. Now, since all these vices are generally admitted to be wanting in the true philosopher, and the preceding catalogue is not likely to be incomplete, we may fairly infer that every one of them is equally absent from his soul. And since, as we have already acknowledged, all these qualities of the soul have corresponding external forms in which they dwell, and find expression, we may say that, if the soul of the philosopher is perfect, he will partake of none of these, but will be simple, true, pure, true-tempered, magnanimous, grateful, pious, and the same in all respects. He will also have true pleasures and true desires, of which he will make true use, and will have true thoughts and true reasonings about beautiful, just, holy, and noble things, and will understand, and of his own accord order the affairs of State and the life of individuals, looking to the greatest good of every soul, and not to any other end. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "They're always being misunderstood. They want to do everything their own way, and they never even ask anybody else what he wants."""" The philosophers are the salt of the earth,"" said his friend. And the rest of us have got to take it."" Do you ever see any of them?"" asked the other. Oh sure,"" said his friend. ""I'm a teacher in a public school, and I've had plenty of them for students. But I don't like to talk about it."""" Why not?"" Because if you start talking about the philosophers, you've got to start talking about your friends and your teachers too. And when you get through, everybody's gone. I don't know how many times I've seen my best friend disappear just because I happened to mention the word 'philosopher.' It's a wonder I still have any friends left. My wife has quit talking to me altogether; she says she can't understand a word I say. You see, it gets so that whenever I open my mouth, out comes something about the philosophers. And my wife doesn't know anything about them. She doesn't care anything about them either, and she thinks I ought to be ashamed of myself for spending all my time thinking about things that don't matter. She says she wishes I'd go back to law again. Maybe she's right. When I started practicing law, I didn't talk about the philosophers much. At least, not as much as I do now. But then I hadn't met any yet. If you want to meet some philosophers, why don't you come with me tomorrow night?"""" Where will we go?"" There's a dance over at the Y.M.C.A. Some of the boys from the university are going."""" Who are the boys from the university?"" Just regular guys who are taking some philosophy courses. They think they're pretty smart, but they aren't. There's a girl there that I used to know. Her father teaches philosophy. He's a philosopher himself. His name is Gruen."""" What does he teach?"" All kinds of things. He's the one who wrote the book on 'The Philosophers of Ancient Greece,' the one that we used last year in history."""" Was he a history teacher?"" No, he was a philosophy teacher. He's a philosopher. I told you he was a philosopher."""" Well, why did you say he was a history teacher?"" Because he teaches history. And besides, he writes books about the philosophers of ancient Greece, and the Greeks were the first ones that ever taught history."""" So you mean he's a historian and a philosopher?"" Sure! Why shouldn't he be both? It doesn't hurt people to be both. The historians don't mind, and neither do the philosophers. They're both important. We need them both."""" But you said that the philosophers were the most important."" Well, they are. But it doesn't hurt to have a good historian along to keep track of things. Besides, he knows a lot of stuff about the philosophers that they don't know themselves. He tells me all kinds of things about them, and he explains what they meant by all the different words they use in their books. " 92 92 "No doubt, he said. Then, Adeimantus, I said, the worthy disciples of philosophy willbe but a small remnant: perchance some noble and well-educated person,detained by exile in her service, who in the absence of corruptinginfluences remains devoted to her; or some lofty soul born in a meancity, the politics of which he contemns and neglects; and there maybe a gifted few who leave the arts, which they justly despise, andcome to her; --or peradventure there are some who are restrained byour friend Theages' bridle; for everything in the life of Theagesconspired to divert him from philosophy; but ill-health kept him awayfrom politics. My own case of the internal sign is hardly worth mentioning,for rarely, if ever, has such a monitor been given to any other man.Those who belong to this small class have tasted how sweet and blesseda possession philosophy is, and have also seen enough of the madnessof the multitude; and they know that no politician is honest, noris there any champion of justice at whose side they may fight andbe saved. Such an one may be compared to a man who has fallen amongwild beasts --he will not join in the wickedness of his fellows, butneither is he able singly to resist all their fierce natures, andtherefore seeing that he would be of no use to the State or to hisfriends, and reflecting that he would have to throw away his lifewithout doing any good either to himself or others, he holds his peace,and goes his own way. He is like one who, in the storm of dust andsleet which the driving wind hurries along, retires under the shelterof a wall; and seeing the rest of mankind full of wickedness, he iscontent, if only he can live his own life and be pure from evil orunrighteousness, and depart in peace and good-will, with bright hopes. Yes, he said, and he will have done a great work before he departs. A great work --yes; but not the greatest, unless he find a State suitableto him; for in a State which is suitable to him, he will have a largergrowth and be the saviour of his country, as well as of himself. @@ -2315,17 +2315,17 @@ What is there remaining? The question how the study of philosophy may be so orde Still, he said, let the point be cleared up, and the enquiry willthen be complete. I shall not be hindered, I said, by any want of will, but, if at all,by a want of power: my zeal you may see for yourselves; and pleaseto remark in what I am about to say how boldly and unhesitatinglyI declare that States should pursue philosophy, not as they do now,but in a different spirit." "Summary: The speaker discusses the nature of philosophy and its relationship to the state, arguing that current governments are unsuitable for it. Narrative arc: Exposition -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Enlightenment +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Adeimantus, Socrates -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "It is, however, a long way from the nature of philosophy to the question which you put; and I should like to know whether I really answered your first question when I said that the state would be the best in which the greatest number of persons are rendered happiest. But see what happens when we reflect on this; for then we shall have a better notion of good and evil states. According to us, no one will be a philosopher if he has the option, for all who do not make money are always very much against him. Money, as we know, goes with refined and soft pleasures, and those who love them are gentle and take their fill of softness. Now are not the gentle and refined natures philosophers?"""" Adeimantus: Yes."" Socrates: Then no gentle person or lover of luxury will be a philosopher? Adeimantus: Clearly not."" Socrates: And surely the rough, passionate, wild, high-spirited nature who would fain rule and lead, who is full of fire and energy, and whose eye glances boldy about under the influence of passion, this man passionately loving power and honours, will never be a lover of philosophy?"""" Adeimantus: Never."" Socrates: Then whom will the philosophic nature choose? Will he not choose the mean statesman, the man who is neither gentle nor high-minded, who is always busy, who has not much to say for himself, who is rather the duller sort of man; also poor, and a low temper, not having much of anything in himself, and hardly able to support the war which he wages against other men? Is not that the sort of man whom he will choose?"" Adeimantus: He would like him better, my dear Socrates, than any other, because these are the men who are worthy of trust and government."" Socrates: Most true, he will love them and seek them out; for they are apt to be neglected by others. Did you never observe how these men are hunted down in cities, because they never hold up their heads, but are always under the rose; like the tree which is not worth plucking, and which therefore is left standing?"""" Adeimantus: Very true. Socrates: And yet they are generally the most efficacious of all in every society; they only want courage and spirit to be great. If there were such a thing as an intermediate fortune between poverty and wealth, of which they could hardly be deprived, they would be the only powers that would hold together states and nations."""" Adeimantus: Why is that, Socrates?"" Socrates: Why, because they love every sort of honour, not through being mean, but through being gentle and noble; they would be disdained by honourable souls, and would be worshipped by the mean. Also, because they rule over us by persuasion, and not by force, and they persuade us to be gentle to one another. " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "Adeimantus, Adeimantus. Don't talk Greek. It makes me sick."""" But I'm talking in English!"" he cried. """"Listen: philosophy, in the true sense of the word, has nothing to do with governments or politicians or states. Philosophy is concerned only with truth. A state can be a lot of things, but it can't be true. In fact, every state in existence today is false, so what's the use of trying to have a philosopher-king?"""" He looked at us sharply. You've got it all wrong,"" Socrates said. ""If a philosopher wants to live in society, he must rule. There's no other way for him."""" Yeah, yeah,"" he muttered sarcastically. ""But why should we want philosophers around? If you're such an authority on logic and psychology, tell me that."" Because they are the only people who can save us from chaos,"" Socrates answered mildly. ""Because they alone possess the secret of happiness."""" He turned to me. And what about you, Mr. Reardon?"" he asked. ""Are you a happy man?"""" Very happy,"" I said. ""I enjoy my work, I have everything I need, I don't let anything bother me..."""" What would happen if you suddenly lost your work? Would you be happy then?"" he interrupted. I'd find something else,"" I said. ""Surely there are enough jobs around."""" That's not the point. Let's suppose you were suddenly faced with starvation. Would you be happy then?"""" No,"" I said. ""Of course I wouldn't."" But you're prepared for it?"" he asked. ""You know it could happen to you any day?"""" Yes,"" I said. ""I've often thought about it."" Good,"" he said. ""Now we're getting somewhere. You see, the trouble with you is that you're afraid of the future. You spend most of your time thinking about the future, worrying about it, planning for it."""" I smiled. """"It's hard not to think about it when you're always being told it might be better tomorrow than it is today."""" Exactly,"" he said. ""And that's just another lie. You'll never be happier until you stop worrying about the future and concentrate on the present."""" So you say,"" I said. ""But it's easier to say than do. How am I going to forget the future when it's staring me in the face all the time?"""" You won't forget it,"" he said. ""You'll accept it."""" Accept it! How can I accept it when I don't understand it?"" Oh, you understand it very well,"" he said. ""You know perfectly well what the future holds for you."""" I was beginning to get irritated. """"You keep telling me I understand things that I don't understand,"""" I said. """"Why don't you explain them?"""" Why don't you explain them yourself?"" he retorted. " 93 93 "In what manner? At present, I said, the students of philosophy are quite young; beginningwhen they are hardly past childhood, they devote only the time savedfrom moneymaking and housekeeping to such pursuits; and even thoseof them who are reputed to have most of the philosophic spirit, whenthey come within sight of the great difficulty of the subject, I meandialectic, take themselves off. In after life when invited by someone else, they may, perhaps, go and hear a lecture, and about thisthey make much ado, for philosophy is not considered by them to betheir proper business: at last, when they grow old, in most casesthey are extinguished more truly than Heracleitus' sun, inasmuch asthey never light up again. But what ought to be their course? Just the opposite. In childhood and youth their study, and what philosophythey learn, should be suited to their tender years: during this periodwhile they are growing up towards manhood, the chief and special careshould be given to their bodies that they may have them to use inthe service of philosophy; as life advances and the intellect beginsto mature, let them increase the gymnastics of the soul; but whenthe strength of our citizens fails and is past civil and militaryduties, then let them range at will and engage in no serious labour,as we intend them to live happily here, and to crown this life witha similar happiness in another. How truly in earnest you are, Socrates! he said; I am sure of that;and yet most of your hearers, if I am not mistaken, are likely tobe still more earnest in their opposition to you, and will never beconvinced; Thrasymachus least of all. @@ -2337,14 +2337,14 @@ And this was what we foresaw, and this was the reason why truth forcedus to admi Quite right. If then, in the countless ages of the past, or at the present hourin some foreign clime which is far away and beyond our ken, the perfectedphilosopher is or has been or hereafter shall be compelled by a superiorpower to have the charge of the State, we are ready to assert to thedeath, that this our constitution has been, and is --yea, and willbe whenever the Muse of Philosophy is queen. There is no impossibilityin all this; that there is a difficulty, we acknowledge ourselves. My opinion agrees with yours, he said. But do you mean to say that this is not the opinion of the multitude?" "Summary: The speaker discusses the current state of philosophy and suggests that philosophers should play a more active role in society. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: First-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic idealism -Active character: Socrates, Thrasymachus" "What's your trouble?"""" Socrates."" Oh, I had a hard time getting up the nerve to come here. The city's full of people like you who think they know everything about philosophy. I'm afraid they'll laugh at me."""" Don't worry about them,"" said Thrasymachus. ""Just give it your best shot."""" Well, it's just this: I've been thinking about the state of philosophy in the city today, and it's not good. And it's all because we philosophers aren't doing our job."""" How so?"" Well, my friends, there are three kinds of jobs that philosophers should be doing. First, there's teaching and research. Second, there's writing books to explain philosophy to ordinary people. Third, there's applying philosophy to real-life situations. We're doing none of these things. Instead, we spend our days talking with each other about whatever comes into our heads. You don't even need to be a philosopher to do that! Anyone can do that!"""" That's true,"" said Thrasymachus. ""But what's wrong with it?"""" Nothing's wrong with it as long as you're just talking for fun. But when you take yourself too seriously and start acting like an expert on everything, then you're being stupid."""" Why is that?"" Because only a fool would try to apply abstract theories to concrete situations. A farmer doesn't have to understand every detail of farming; he just needs to know how to plant and water his crops. Likewise, a shoemaker doesn't need to know how to make shoes from scratch; he just needs to know how to repair them. In the same way, a philosopher doesn't need to know everything about every subject; he just needs to know where to find information about it."""" So why can't we just ask someone else if we don't know something?"" Because not everyone knows what they know. Some people know a lot about one thing but nothing about another. Others know a little bit about a lot of things but not enough to be considered experts. And still others claim to know everything when they really don't know anything at all."""" So what should we do?"" We should learn to recognize our own ignorance and admit it. Then we'll know when to seek help from others and when to trust ourselves alone. And if we follow this advice, we won't make fools of ourselves anymore."""" That makes sense,"" said Thrasymachus. ""I'm glad you brought it up. Now let's see how well you can put it into practice."""" What do you mean?"" I mean I want you to show me how to solve a problem. I've got a riddle for you."""" A riddle? Okay, go ahead."" It's about a man named Oedipus."" Who was he?"" He was a Greek king who lived a long time ago. He was very smart and very powerful, but he also had a big problem."""" What was it?"" " +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: Socrates, Thrasymachus" And what does the philosophy of today amount to? It is like a man who thinks he can get on without living. If there is any truth in this, philosophers ought to be conspicuous for their character, for their conduct, for their example, for their influence upon others; and they ought to be always ready to take an active part in public affairs and to guide them. But now we see them far from that; they hide themselves away, and if one of them does venture to come out into the light, it is only to try to show you that nothing matters and that there is no difference between good and evil.” This was Socrates’ own position. “What!” said Thrasymachus. “Even when they have themselves been wronged?” “Yes,” said Socrates; “they are as willing to be defrauded of their rights as anyone else is.” “Then their lives are worth just as much as yours or mine, and they are not worthy of any more respect.” “I never said so.” “No, but you implied it. I am beginning to understand you. The philosopher is a sort of animal without spirit, who blinks at the sun, and wanders about the world with a listless eye, knowing neither how to follow nor how to lead, and who holds that rest is a better thing than activity, and friendship than justice.” “You mean to say,” said Socrates, “that I think a man who is able to defend himself and his friends, and, if necessary, to attack his enemies, has a better chance of preserving himself and his friends, and of having more friends and fewer enemies, than a man who cannot defend himself or his friends, or do anything which is likely to protect him or them against injustice?” “Yes, that is what I mean.” “Then my words will not be very difficult to understand. I agree with you in thinking that the man who is able to strike hardest is most likely to have his way with another man whom he wants to hurt; but I also think that the man who is best able to benefit should be allowed to benefit his friends and harm his enemies; that is what I mean by being able to ‘do justice.’” “But surely a man who benefits some and harms others is a criminal.” “Not at all, if he desires both parties to be benefited. He is a benefactor to both, because from having suffered he is able to heal.” “What do you mean?” “I mean to say that the physician who likes health and hates disease is a benefactor to patients who are ill, but would never dream of hurting anybody; and in the same way the general who is fond of victory and hates defeat will be a benefactor to the conquered as well as to the conquerors.” “Yes, but the conquerors may not be fond of victory.” “Then he will not hurt them; he will be using violence, no doubt, but he will not be harming them.” “Very good,” said Thrasymachus; “and suppose that such a general were attacking a city which he had designed to capture, would he really care whether he injured the place or not? 94 94 "I should imagine not, he replied. O my friend, I said, do not attack the multitude: they will changetheir minds, if, not in an aggressive spirit, but gently and withthe view of soothing them and removing their dislike of over-education,you show them your philosophers as they really are and describe asyou were just now doing their character and profession, and then mankindwill see that he of whom you are speaking is not such as they supposed--if they view him in this new light, they will surely change theirnotion of him, and answer in another strain. Who can be at enmitywith one who loves them, who that is himself gentle and free fromenvy will be jealous of one in whom there is no jealousy? Nay, letme answer for you, that in a few this harsh temper may be found butnot in the majority of mankind. I quite agree with you, he said. And do you not also think, as I do, that the harsh feeling which themany entertain towards philosophy originates in the pretenders, whorush in uninvited, and are always abusing them, and finding faultwith them, who make persons instead of things the theme of their conversation?and nothing can be more unbecoming in philosophers than this. It is most unbecoming. For he, Adeimantus, whose mind is fixed upon true being, has surelyno time to look down upon the affairs of earth, or to be filled withmalice and envy, contending against men; his eye is ever directedtowards things fixed and immutable, which he sees neither injuringnor injured by one another, but all in order moving according to reason;these he imitates, and to these he will, as far as he can, conformhimself. Can a man help imitating that with which he holds reverentialconverse? @@ -2360,15 +2360,15 @@ Indeed, he said, in no way could they make a fairer picture. And now, I said, are we beginning to persuade those whom you describedas rushing at us with might and main, that the painter of constitutionsis such an one as we are praising; at whom they were so very indignantbecause to his hands we committed the State; and are they growinga little calmer at what they have just heard? Much calmer, if there is any sense in them. Why, where can they still find any ground for objection? Will theydoubt that the philosopher is a lover of truth and being? They would not be so unreasonable. Or that his nature, being such as we have delineated, is akin to thehighest good?" "Summary: The speaker discusses the nature of philosophers and their role in society. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation Active character: The speaker, Adeimantus -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "If you can't understand that, there is no use in trying to explain it to you. Adeimantus. Approach and reply, Socrates! The Athenians say that you are a rogue."""" Socrates. I mean to answer the gentlemen in accordance with their several merits; accordingly if any of them believe me to be an erring mortal, he will be deceived by my rouge; whereas he who thinks me a god will find out that I am a god because I am able to distinguish one of them from the other. Adeimantus. You know that they also affirm the poets to be inspired by muses. Will you venture to go against them?"""" Socrates. Perhaps the poets themselves would not venture to go against them; but what have they to do with us? For we should be meaning something quite different when we affirm that knowledge is better than ignorance; at present we are talking of philosophers in the ordinary sense of the word. And we were saying that they were not expected or required to make every man immortal, as the poets and musicians are; but that they only had to show the nature of the best form of government. Shall we resume this discussion at some other time?"""" Glaucon. By all means, Socrates; and that minute. " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" It’s a question of knowing the nature of philosophers. They are very much like worms, you know; they have no blood in their veins and no heart. If you cut them in two you won’t find even a grain of corn in them, because they’ve been eating that sort of thing all their lives! They’re not human beings, they’re lice!” Adeimantus was still more astonished by this remark than by the preceding one. “And yet,” he said, “they seem to be human enough when I listen to them.” “You’ll soon stop listening to them,” replied Maigret. “What did you say? ‘They’re human beings’? You know what they are, don’t you? They’re simply pieces of timber or metal which people have given up thinking about, so now they talk for the sake of talking, just as some people whistle when they walk along the street. They pretend to want something and actually want nothing at all. Do you realize what they do with themselves? They spend their time picking over old ideas, changing the names of things, setting up new theories and systems which nobody understands and which they themselves don’t understand either. For instance, they never speak of anything but God, Providence, the soul, life after death, truth, perfection... The word God is on their lips all the time and yet it means nothing at all to them. They use it the way other people use words like Monsieur, Madame, Your Excellency, or Your Lordship. As for truth and perfection, they’re great believers in these too, only they can’t define them and aren’t even sure whether they exist! It’s an interesting spectacle, isn’t it? People who, without suspecting it, resemble the vermin on whose backs they sit and feed. Perhaps you’d like to hear the story of a conversation I had with a professor from the Sorbonne? Well then, here goes: ‘You believe in God?’ ‘I’m an agnostic.’ ‘Do you believe in Providence?’ ‘I’m a fatalist.’ ‘Do you believe in life after death?’ ‘I don’t know.’ ‘In truth?’ ‘I’m a realist.’ ‘In perfection?’ ‘I’m a pessimist.’ ‘I see,’ I said. ‘So you’re an agnostic, a fatalist, a non-believer, a pessimist, and a realist?’ ‘Precisely!’ ‘Well, my friend, if there’s one thing certain it’s that you’re a fool! A fool pure and simple! And, if you go on talking nonsense like this, you’ll end up by convincing yourself that you’re a genius!’ “That amused him rather. He thought it would amuse me too. When I made no response, he asked me what I was going to do about Lapouge. ‘Nothing.’ ‘But, surely—’ ‘No. There’s nothing I can do.’ ‘But, Inspector—’ ‘What?’ ‘Surely you must have some idea?’ ‘None whatever. 95 95 "Neither can they doubt this. But again, will they tell us that such a nature, placed under favourablecircumstances, will not be perfectly good and wise if any ever was?Or will they prefer those whom we have rejected? Surely not. Then will they still be angry at our saying, that, until philosophersbear rule, States and individuals will have no rest from evil, norwill this our imaginary State ever be realised? I think that they will be less angry. Shall we assume that they are not only less angry but quite gentle,and that they have been converted and for very shame, if for no otherreason, cannot refuse to come to terms? @@ -2385,17 +2385,17 @@ I perfectly remember, he said. Yes, my friend, I said, and I then shrank from ha Yes, he said, let that be affirmed. And do not suppose that there will be many of them; for the giftswhich were deemed by us to be essential rarely grow together; theyare mostly found in shreds and patches. What do you mean? he said. You are aware, I replied, that quick intelligence, memory, sagacity,cleverness, and similar qualities, do not often grow together, andthat persons who possess them and are at the same time high-spiritedand magnanimous are not so constituted by nature as to live orderlyand in a peaceful and settled manner; they are driven any way by theirimpulses, and all solid principle goes out of them." "Summary: The text discusses the nature of philosophers and their role in society, questioning whether they can bring about a perfect state. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Two characters engaged in conversation -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "Let's take a look at the philosophers who have been in your business. I'll grant you they're a pretty hard-boiled lot. They've got to be, with the kind of material they have to work with."""" What do you mean?"" I mean men,"" said my friend. ""And that's about all there is to them. You may say it's rather an unkind thing to say, but that's just what they are. If you want to get anywhere as a philosopher you've got to start with that basic fact. All the rest is just embroidery and window dressing."""" But if that's true, how can you expect philosophers to bring about a perfect state?"" Because they don't try,"" said the doctor. ""They know better than to tackle a job like that."""" It seems to me,"" I said, ""that you're putting them down a bit too much."""" Yes,"" said my friend. ""I am. That's why we call them cynics."""" Isn't that going a bit far?"" asked the doctor. Well, it is and it isn't,"" said my friend. ""It's just as far as you need to go to keep them from getting conceited. For instance, here's Socrates, this old goat here. He was about the smartest philosopher that ever lived, and yet he never had any illusions about himself. He knew his limitations and stuck to them. He didn't try to do anything that he couldn't handle. And that's why he made good. The other fellows were always trying to improve their minds by reading books or listening to speeches. Old Socrates wouldn't have anything to do with that sort of stuff. He used to walk around on the street corners, talking to people. That's the way he kept in touch with reality. He didn't forget that philosophy is just a game. That's the secret of his success. He did the one thing he could do well and let the other fellows worry about how to run the world. That's the trick of it, Doc. Every man ought to find out what he can do best and stick to that. There's more in that than you'd think at first glance."""" I'm afraid I don't see it,"" said the doctor. """"But then, I'm only a country practitioner."""" My dear fellow,"" said my friend, ""that's just where you come in. You're a shrewd diagnostician and a darned good surgeon. And you're plenty good enough for this town. If you tried to cure all the diseases in the world you'd lose your bearings. You'd end up in the lunatic asylum yourself. And if you started cutting everybody who came to you, you'd soon be without patients. Leave those jobs to the specialists. Stick to the kind of surgery you understand and leave the rest alone. That's the ticket."""" " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "If you want to know what philosophers are like, look at the other guy's face."""" The other guy was a tall, muscular man in his late thirties. He had a clean-shaven head and eyes that burned with an unnatural intensity. His shoulders were hunched forward in a perpetual crouch. In spite of his height he looked as though he were hiding from something or someone. And I said: """"You've got it all wrong, Doctor. Philosophers aren't any different from ordinary people. If they were, they wouldn't be able to understand anything about the world we live in."""" That's a good story,"" he sneered. ""Is that why you're trying to run away from me?"""" No."" He stood up quickly and walked across to the window. The rain was still falling, but the sun was shining through the clouds. It made a silvery path along the floor and over the backs of our heads. There was a vividness about everything that made it seem unreal. Even the doctor seemed different. He had taken off his coat and jacket and hung them over the back of his chair. He wore a white shirt open at the neck and a black tie. His face was flushed and his hair was wet and plastered down on his forehead. He looked like a country lad who had just come in from working in the fields. What do you mean no?"" he asked. ""I thought you were running away from me."""" I wasn't running away from you, Doctor. I'm not afraid of you. I don't believe you can do anything to me."""" He sat down again and lit a cigarette. What do you think I can do to you?"" he asked quietly. Nothing. You can't hurt me."""" You're sure of that?"""" He blew a stream of smoke towards the window. Well, let's suppose I can. What would you do if I tried to hurt you?"""" Nothing."" Just nothing?"" Yes."" He smiled faintly. """"That's the answer of a philosopher. Do you know what a philosopher is?"""" No."" Then listen carefully while I tell you. A philosopher is a person who has spent so much time thinking about life that he is unable to live it. He is always on the outside looking in. That's why he's always asking questions. Like a little boy. But there's one difference between a philosopher and a little boy. A little boy never tries to run away when you ask him a question."""" I didn't run away from you, Doctor."" Did you notice how you slipped into calling me 'Doctor'? That's another trick philosophers use. They give themselves titles to make themselves important. That's because they have nothing inside themselves."""" I'm sorry."" Why are you apologizing? Apologizing for what?"" For having an opinion about philosophers. I shouldn't have spoken to you that way."""" " 96 96 "Very true, he said. On the other hand, those steadfast natures which can better be dependedupon, which in a battle are impregnable to fear and immovable, areequally immovable when there is anything to be learned; they are alwaysin a torpid state, and are apt to yawn and go to sleep over any intellectualtoil. Quite true. And yet we were saying that both qualities were necessary in thoseto whom the higher education is to be imparted, and who are to sharein any office or command. Certainly, he said. And will they be a class which is rarely found? Yes, indeed. Then the aspirant must not only be tested in those labours and dangersand pleasures which we mentioned before, but there is another kindof probation which we did not mention --he must be exercised alsoin many kinds of knowledge, to see whether the soul will be able toendure the highest of all, will faint under them, as in any otherstudies and exercises. @@ -2413,15 +2413,15 @@ Yes, I said, there is. And of the virtues too we must behold not theoutline mere A right noble thought; but do you suppose that we shall refrain fromasking you what is this highest knowledge? Nay, I said, ask if you will; but I am certain that you have heardthe answer many times, and now you either do not understand me or,as I rather think, you are disposed to be troublesome; for you haveof been told that the idea of good is the highest knowledge, and thatall other things become useful and advantageous only by their useof this. You can hardly be ignorant that of this I was about to speak,concerning which, as you have often heard me say, we know so little;and, without which, any other knowledge or possession of any kindwill profit us nothing. Do you think that the possession of all otherthings is of any value if we do not possess the good? or the knowledgeof all other things if we have no knowledge of beauty and goodness? Assuredly not. You are further aware that most people affirm pleasure to be the good,but the finer sort of wits say it is knowledge" "Summary: The speaker discusses the importance of both steadfastness and learning in education and knowledge. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonism +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The speaker, interlocutor -Quoted work: ""The Republic"" by Plato" "I'm not a bit surprised to find you're no scholar,"" said the speaker. """"You show it in every word you say."""" I beg your pardon!"" I cried. ""I thought I was talking quite plain."""" Plain, nothing!"" retorted the other. ""Why, you don't know what 'plain' means. You'll have to learn that first of all. It's one of the very things you've got to get into your head if you want to amount to anything: how to understand and use words. That's why I always tell my boys to begin by learning Greek."""" Well,"" I replied, ""I daresay you may be right; but anyhow, even supposing you are, I shall never learn Greek in this world. I can't afford the time. I haven't got the money to spare for such nonsense as that."""" Nonsense, indeed!"" he exclaimed. ""And what is more, you're just the kind of young fool who talks about 'nonsense,' when he doesn't know a word of the language that makes all the rest of human knowledge possible!"""" He seemed to have worked himself up into a regular rage. """"Now just listen to me, my lad,"""" he went on, """"and take down what I'm going to say. You're going to find out that there's a good deal more in education than you think. In the first place, it's the thing that matters most in life. And in the second place, there are two kinds of education the kind that comes from books, and the kind that comes from experience. Now, don't you open your mouth till I've done talking, because I mean to go on and explain to you just how these two kinds of education work together."""" All right,"" I answered; ""go ahead."" Well, then,"" continued the old gentleman, ""in the first place, you can't get along without both of them. The one isn't worth anything unless you take the other along with it. There was an old Greek fellow who wrote a book years and years ago called The Republic, where he tells you how education ought to be given in a perfect State. He makes out that there are three parts to it; and, by George, he was right! For, you see, there's really only one part of it that counts that which teaches people to do their duty; and that, of course, has got to be the backbone of everything else. But the other two parts are just as necessary as the first. They make you strong and active, so that you can carry out what you have learned; and they give you pleasure in doing it, so that you will like to carry it out."""" By Jove!"" I exclaimed. ""If you could only get that into some of the fellows at college, we might really have a chance of making something out of them."""" Yes,"" he said; ""that's just what you would have to do if you were educating them properly. " +Quoted work: ""The Republic"" by Plato" "Let me remind you that I am a poor man and that the only thing I can give is what is in my head."""" Then, adding """"I should be quite willing to let you have a copy of Plato's Republic,"""" he took out his pocket-book. I think not,"" said Spade coldly; ""that wouldn't suit me. I'm not a scholar or a philosopher or anything else except a hardboiled detective. What I want is the stuff that goes on inside a guy like Wilmer Cook, so when I meet another one I'll know what buttons to push to get results."""" The trouble with you is that you're entirely unscientific."" Is that a fact?"" asked Spade harshly. Yes, it is. Your method is the method of the amateur, not the professional. You work by feeling instead of by reasoning."""" By feeling?"" repeated Spade. Yes; by feeling. Don't you remember your own words? 'You've got something wrong here,' you said to Polhaus, 'and I've got to find out what it is.' Well, that's the way an artist feels about his work. He knows there's something wrong with it; he wants to find out what it is. You ought to read Aristotle's Poetics."""" Spade laughed unpleasantly. """"Well,"""" he said, """"it isn't my business to make pictures or write poetry or do any of those things. It's my business to find out what makes people tick and then to make them tick right. That's all there is to it. But if you think it'll help me to learn how Shakespeare did it, or Homer, or whoever it was that wrote The Republic, I don't mind reading up on them."""" The speaker looked at him with ferocious admiration. """"Spade!"""" he exclaimed, shaking his head slowly. """"What you are now is not a man; you are a system! Do you suppose I'd waste my time telling you about Aristotle if I didn't believe it would help you? We need the same sort of knowledge, but we use it differently. You take the facts as they are given to you and turn them over and over until you see how they fit together. I take the facts and arrange them into patterns and look for the ones that fit the pattern of life as I see it. And when I have found two or three of these, I know that I have the truth, no matter how many facts still seem to be out of place."""" In other words,"" said Spade sneeringly, ""you take a lot of guesswork and fancy that it's science."""" Now you're talking like a fool!"" cried the speaker, turning red. """"But I won't quarrel with you about it. " 97 97 "Yes. And you are aware too that the latter cannot explain what they meanby knowledge, but are obliged after all to say knowledge of the good? How ridiculous! Yes, I said, that they should begin by reproaching us with our ignoranceof the good, and then presume our knowledge of it --for the good theydefine to be knowledge of the good, just as if we understood themwhen they use the term 'good' --this is of course ridiculous. Most true, he said. And those who make pleasure their good are in equal perplexity; forthey are compelled to admit that there are bad pleasures as well asgood. @@ -2443,17 +2443,17 @@ Still, I must implore you, Socrates, said Glaucon, not to turn awayjust as you a Yes, my friend, and I shall be at least equally satisfied, but I cannothelp fearing that I shall fall, and that my indiscreet zeal will bringridicule upon me. No, sweet sirs, let us not at present ask what isthe actual nature of the good, for to reach what is now in my thoughtswould be an effort too great for me. But of the child of the goodwho is likest him, I would fain speak, if I could be sure that youwished to hear --otherwise, not. By all means, he said, tell us about the child, and you shall remainin our debt for the account of the parent." "Summary: The text discusses the nature of knowledge and the good, with characters debating the concepts. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog between characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, Glaucon -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "It's not a matter of taking from you something you know. I'm going to give you knowledge of the nature of knowledge and the good, so that you may be able to give an account of what knowledge is."""" If it's a matter of giving an account, just as you say,"" said Glaucon, ""I think we shall easily be convinced by you when you get around to explaining what the nature of knowledge and the good are."""" Socrates smiled and said: Then I suppose I'll have to start at the beginning."" Fine!"" said Glaucon. And do you know what this story is about?"" Of course I don't,"" said Glaucon, ""but I'll follow whatever you tell me."" Very well, then,"" said Socrates. ""Perhaps the best way for me to explain would be to tell you a mythological story."""" A mythological story? What kind?"" The kind in which there are gods and heroes and all sorts of marvelous creatures. So if you like stories of that sort, I'll tell you one. It seems to me it will help us with our present discussion."""" Well, I've always been fond of hearing stories,"" said Glaucon, ""and especially stories about gods and heroes."""" Good!"" said Socrates. ""Then sit down again and listen to what I'm going to say."""" 2. The Myth of Er After telling the story of the cave, Socrates asks Glaucon whether he believes it or not. He says he doesn't really care whether Glaucon believes it or not, but adds that it is better not to make light of myths, for they represent true events and happenings. They are also useful for children, and even grown men, he says, need them for certain purposes, such as the purpose of getting rid of bad men. But now he must leave these things and go on to the end of his story. This, he says, is about another man who lived in the same country as Adeimantus and Glaucon. His name was Er, and he was born after the others, and died in battle during the tenth year of the war. On the twelfth day after his death, when they were preparing him for burial, his body was found to be completely untouched and uninjured. The magistrates decided to investigate, and summoned the nearest relatives. When they were assembled, they consulted the Oracle at Delphi about what should be done with Er. The god said that he should be buried, but nothing else; and that within nine days he would be alive again. At this they were amazed and perplexed, but nevertheless they did as the god commanded and buried him. Nine days later, the magistrates sent for his family to come to the place of burial. They had a dream, they said, and wanted to consult them about it. The next morning, as soon as it was light, they saw to their amazement that the tombstone was off its place and that Er was lying on top of it, apparently alive. " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "I didn't say I liked it. And you aren't going to get a kick out of knowing what's good for you until you've had your share of the other kind."""" Oh, shut up,"" said Glaucon. ""I'm telling you there is no such thing as absolute knowledge, and that's all there is to it."""" You're just talking in order to talk."" But Socrates continued: You say 'absolute' when you mean 'the highest.'"" Oh, stop it. I don't even know what the highest is."" Then why do you keep saying it? If you don't know what the highest is, how do you know it can be found in anything?"""" It isn't always in anything,"" said Glaucon. ""It's often not there at all."" You haven't a notion of what you're talking about,"" said Socrates. """"You're babbling incoherently."""" You think you're so smart, don't you?"" Glaucon demanded. Very well,"" said Socrates. ""Let's hear what you think you know."""" I told you before, I'm not going to play any more of your goddam games,"" Glaucon said. He was getting very angry. All right,"" said Socrates. ""Go back to your room and sit on your bed and rock yourself and cry."""" Let me tell you something,"" said Glaucon. ""If you talk like that much longer I'm going to sock you in the jaw."""" So you'll have to do it now,"" said Socrates. Glaucon didn't say anything else. He got up and went into his own room and closed the door. After a few minutes he opened it again and looked out, but Socrates was sitting quietly by the window, smoking a cigarette. Well?"" said Socrates. Nothing."" Do you want to hear the rest of the dialogue or not?"" No."" Then go away."" Glaucon slammed the door again. Socrates lit another cigarette and sat and smoked it slowly. The telephone rang. Hello,"" he said. ""Yes, this is Socrates. I see. Yes, I think it is. Is that so? Certainly. Well, we'll have to let them know. Thanks for the tip.... Yes, I suppose they will. Good-bye."""" He hung up the receiver and stood looking at it. That was the District Attorney,"" he said. ""A couple of cops were walking down the street and saw a man they knew from the neighborhood drop a bundle of money in the gutter. They picked it up and took it over to the station house, and the D.A.'s secretary called me up to find out if it belonged to me. I said yes, it did, and the D.A. wants to know if I want to report it stolen.... Well, do you suppose that I reported it stolen?"""" Who?"" said Philip. " 98 98 "I do indeed wish, I replied, that I could pay, and you receive, theaccount of the parent, and not, as now, of the offspring only; take,however, this latter by way of interest, and at the same time havea care that i do not render a false account, although I have no intentionof deceiving you. Yes, we will take all the care that we can: proceed. Yes, I said, but I must first come to an understanding with you, andremind you of what I have mentioned in the course of this discussion,and at many other times. What? The old story, that there is a many beautiful and a many good, andso of other things which we describe and define; to all of them 'many'is applied. @@ -2478,17 +2478,17 @@ Will you be a little more explicit? he said. Why, you know, I said, that the eye Very true. But when they are directed towards objects on which the sun shines,they see clearly and there is sight in them?" "Summary: The speaker discusses the senses and their relationship to light and sight. Trope: Light as a symbol of knowledge and truth Narrative arc: Exposition and explanation -Enunciation: First-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonism +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The speaker and the person being addressed -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" “Was it that which you wished to know?” I asked. “No,” he answered, “I did not want to know that, for I knew already. But what was it that made you close your eyes?” “What made me do so?” I cried in astonishment. “Why, because I had a feeling that something was coming upon me. Why, indeed?” he said; “and why did you open them again as you did?” “Because,” I replied, “I felt that I could not bear any more.” “And yet you bore it all the time,” he said. “You are a strange man, Mr. Narraway. Now tell me this: why is it that we can see only with our eyes?” I was astonished and began to laugh. “Because we have no other organs of sight, sir. If we had wings we should see like birds; if we were fishes we should see like fishes.” “But it is not true,” he replied. “We see by means of light, and light is not a part of our body. And yet it seems to be a part of us, since it is necessary for our life, and without it we die.” “Well, yes,” I answered, “that is so.” “Tell me,” he continued, “how is it that we can touch things, taste, smell, hear? Are they not parts of us also?” “Yes, in a sense they are, though they are not parts of our bodies,” I said. “But how can they be parts of us unless they belong to our essence? Tell me, how does it happen that when we move our legs we walk, and when we open our mouths we talk? Is it not because there is something within us which moves them and makes us use them? And where can this be but in the very essence of our being? And when we speak or think, do we not express ourselves by means of words? Yet these words are not parts of us, for they exist outside us. How then can we make use of them, except through some power which dwells within us, and through which we communicate with things which are outside us?” He listened to my answer with a smile on his face, and then said: “It seems to me, Mr. Narraway, that you have thought deeply on this matter. It is plain to me that you are one who will find out many things for himself, if only he seeks diligently. Do you not agree with me?” I bowed to him, and said: “Your knowledge of men is greater than mine, sir. You judge me better than I know myself.” “Not at all,” he said. “Come now, let me ask you another question. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" It’s the kind of light you find in hospitals and morgues.” “That’s just it,” I said. “It’s the only light that really shows things as they are. There’s nothing soft or romantic about it, no half-tones, no subtle shadings. It shows you exactly what’s there, and if it doesn’t happen to show what you want to see, then too bad for you.” She thought this over. “It shows everything?” she asked. “Yes, it does,” I said. “And most people hate it because it tells them more than they want to know. A lot of the time, the truth is ugly.” She was silent for a moment, thinking it over. Then she nodded slowly. “I get it,” she said. “You use it because it reveals things plainly, but it also hides things. You can look right at something and not see it, because it’s out in the open and so you don’t pay any attention to it. And if you do notice it, it doesn’t mean anything to you until you understand it.” “You’ve got it,” I said. “That’s the idea. It’s like when you’re reading a book and you come across a passage that makes sense but seems to have nothing to do with the story. At first you skip it because it doesn’t seem to fit, but later on you go back to it and suddenly you see that it’s the key to the whole plot.” “Like a detective story,” she said. “Yes, that’s right. If you didn’t have those passages, you wouldn’t be able to figure out who did it.” “But how would you use that kind of light? I mean, you’d be sitting in front of it, looking into it, wouldn’t you? So how could you see anything?” “That’s another thing,” I said. “The light goes behind you, and you sit facing away from it. That way you can see everything without being blinded by the light itself.” “I see,” she said. “It’s like you said before. The light reveals things plainly, but it also hides things. You can look right at something and not see it, unless you know what to look for.” “That’s right,” I said. “You could walk right past it and never even know it was there, but once you understand it, it jumps out at you.” “So that’s why you use that kind of light,” she said. “To hide things and reveal things at the same time.” “That’s it,” I said. “Now you understand how I work.” 99 99 "Certainly. And the soul is like the eye: when resting upon that on which truthand being shine, the soul perceives and understands and is radiantwith intelligence; but when turned towards the twilight of becomingand perishing, then she has opinion only, and goes blinking about,and is first of one opinion and then of another, and seems to haveno intelligence? Just so. Now, that which imparts truth to the known and the power of knowingto the knower is what I would have you term the idea of good, andthis you will deem to be the cause of science, and of truth in sofar as the latter becomes the subject of knowledge; beautiful too,as are both truth and knowledge, you will be right in esteeming thisother nature as more beautiful than either; and, as in the previousinstance, light and sight may be truly said to be like the sun, andyet not to be the sun, so in this other sphere, science and truthmay be deemed to be like the good, but not the good; the good hasa place of honour yet higher. What a wonder of beauty that must be, he said, which is the authorof science and truth, and yet surpasses them in beauty; for you surelycannot mean to say that pleasure is the good? @@ -2506,13 +2506,13 @@ Very good. Would you not admit that both the sections of this division have diff Most undoubtedly. Next proceed to consider the manner in which the sphere of the intellectualis to be divided. In what manner? Thus: --There are two subdivisions, in the lower or which the souluses the figures given by the former division as images; the enquirycan only be hypothetical, and instead of going upwards to a principledescends to the other end; in the higher of the two, the soul passesout of hypotheses, and goes up to a principle which is above hypotheses,making no use of images as in the former case, but proceeding onlyin and through the ideas themselves." "Summary: The text discusses the relationship between truth, knowledge, and beauty, comparing them to the sun and its light. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy" "Men, I say, are like unto the sun which shines upon all men alike and bestows its light upon the good and the bad. And so Truth is like the sun; it shines upon all alike, but whether or no they see the light, that depends upon themselves. And what matters it to Truth if some choose to go blind? Does not Truth shine upon them as much as upon those who have eyes? Yes; but men do not know the truth until they are taught it by Knowledge, and therefore Knowledge must be beautiful in order that men may desire it. But Beauty alone is not enough to teach us the truth; we must also have Love, for unless we love the thing which is beautiful we shall not take pains to learn it. Therefore the lover of wisdom must be a lover also of Beauty and of Love. Do you understand this?"" said he, ""or would you rather wait till another day?"" The young man replied: """"I am very far from understanding you, but I am ready to listen whenever you please to speak."""" Then said I: """"Let us first ask our friend here what he thinks of these doctrines."""" Dionysius laughed, and said: """"If Diotima can prove her contentions, she will convince me of their truth; if not, she will only convince me of her ignorance."""" " +Literary movement: Hardboiled" “Truth is the sun, and knowledge is the light. Beauty is just a sort of sunshine for the mind, eh? It’s your beauty that shows me the truth.” “I’ll be damned,” said the detective. “If it weren’t for your beauty I’d think you were lying all the time. But you’re not lying now. You don’t know how to lie. You might as well try to lie in sunlight as tell lies to me. Do you get me? The light from your beauty makes everything else look like a fake. You can have any girl in this place—there’s nothing they won’t do for you. They can’t help it. And yet there’s one thing they won’t do for you. They won’t let you kiss them on the mouth. Why?” He sat silent, staring at her with glittering eyes. “Maybe because you’re a maniac?” she said. “You ought to be put away.” “I’m no maniac,” he said, “and you know it. Don’t kid yourself. You know what I am. You know why they won’t let me kiss them. Because they’re afraid of my power. Can you beat that! Afraid of a little white man like me! They’re scared stiff of me, every last one of them!” “You’re crazy,” she repeated, but her voice was less sure. “Maybe I am. Maybe I am. But when I talk about beauty and truth, I know what I’m talking about, don’t I?” “Yes,” she said reluctantly. “Well then, let’s see if you agree with me about other things. Do you think I’m tough?” “No,” she said. “Oh yes, I am,” he insisted. “I’m the toughest guy in this place. Nobody could stand up against me. Not a single person here. Do you get that?” She nodded, saying nothing. “Do you want to know why I’m tough? Because I don’t give a damn about anything. That’s why. Everything is just so much garbage to me. Nothing matters—not even life itself. Do you believe that?” “No,” she said, “that’s ridiculous.” “It isn’t ridiculous,” he said, “it’s true. Look at me. Look at the way I dress. What does it matter how I look? Just so long as I feel good inside. You understand what I mean? If I didn’t care, what does it matter what I wear? It’s the same with everything. Nothing matters. That’s why I’m tough.” He leaned back in his chair, smiling. “That’s why I scare them. They know it. I’m completely indifferent. Nothing means anything to me. How can I be hurt by them? Why should I care? So that’s why I’m tough. I’m too smart for them. They can’t touch me, or find out where I live, or catch me alone. They’ve tried a dozen times. They want to kill me. But they can’t do it. 100 100 "I do not quite understand your meaning, he said. Then I will try again; you will understand me better when I have madesome preliminary remarks. You are aware that students of geometry,arithmetic, and the kindred sciences assume the odd and the even andthe figures and three kinds of angles and the like in their severalbranches of science; these are their hypotheses, which they and everybodyare supposed to know, and therefore they do not deign to give anyaccount of them either to themselves or others; but they begin withthem, and go on until they arrive at last, and in a consistent manner,at their conclusion? Yes, he said, I know. And do you not know also that although they make use of the visibleforms and reason about them, they are thinking not of these, but ofthe ideals which they resemble; not of the figures which they draw,but of the absolute square and the absolute diameter, and so on --theforms which they draw or make, and which have shadows and reflectionsin water of their own, are converted by them into images, but theyare really seeking to behold the things themselves, which can onlybe seen with the eye of the mind? That is true. And of this kind I spoke as the intelligible, although in the searchafter it the soul is compelled to use hypotheses; not ascending toa first principle, because she is unable to rise above the regionof hypothesis, but employing the objects of which the shadows beloware resemblances in their turn as images, they having in relationto the shadows and reflections of them a greater distinctness, andtherefore a higher value. @@ -2525,15 +2525,15 @@ I understand, he replied, and give my assent, and accept your arrangement. BOOK VII Socrates - GLAUCON And now, I said, let me show in a figure how far our nature is enlightenedor unenlightened: --Behold! human beings living in a underground den,which has a mouth open towards the light and reaching all along theden; here they have been from their childhood, and have their legsand necks chained so that they cannot move, and can only see beforethem, being prevented by the chains from turning round their heads.Above and behind them a fire is blazing at a distance, and betweenthe fire and the prisoners there is a raised way; and you will see,if you look, a low wall built along the way, like the screen whichmarionette players have in front of them, over which they show thepuppets." "Summary: The text discusses the use of hypotheses and assumptions in various sciences and the pursuit of knowledge. -Enunciation: Dialogue -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical conversation -Literary movement: Platonism +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, Glaucon -Time setting: Contemporary" E se il filosofo non ha mai bisogno di supporre nulla, come pu capire le scienze, che sono appunto basate sopra ipotesi? Esse suppongono, rispose Socrate. Ma poi, per lo pi, queste ipotesi sono veramente necessarie, e in ci si accordano colla ragione; nel resto sono semplici congetture, e l'errore giunge fino all'incredibile. Se poi vuoi imparare a conoscere la verit, non devi supporre nulla, ma devi andar sempre da una cosa all'altra, senza trascurare nulla di quanto necessario al fine del tuo discorso, finch tu non abbia colto la prima immagine della verit. Questo pu avvenire anche nella nostra attuale discussione. Per esempio: noi abbiamo qui un uomo; chiunque uomo animale; dunque questo uomo pure animale. Che cosa dico? Ci vero oppure no? Mi sembra vero, riprese Glaucon. Bene! Ebbene, non facciamo questa supposizione? Non la facciamo? Certo. Eppure essa una semplice ipotesi, una pura congettura, non vi pare? Forse; ma un'ipotesi necessaria, come hai detto poco fa. Benissimo, continu Socrate, ho capito. Ma noi non ci contentiamo delle definizioni, quando sono vere; ma diamo anche la loro spiegazione. Ci riuscirai utile, poich la spiegazione proprio ci cui io maggiormente attendevo. E perch? chiese Glaucon stupito. Perch, diss'egli, l'intelletto diventa ben presto impacciatissimo nell'indaginare la natura delle cose, se non si ha a che fare coi corpi, che formano lo spettacolo esterno, o con gli uomini, che costituiscono lo spettacolo interiore. Quando invece si tratta dei concetti, la via diventa diritta, e l'intelletto corre subito in iscritto alla meta. Qui per esempio: l'uomo un vivente; il vivente un ente mosso; l'ente mosso un ente composto di contrari; il corpo un siffatto ente; pertanto l'uomo possiede un corpo. Questo passaggio dal principio alla conseguenza assai agevole, e si pu farlo istantaneamente, anzi senza averlo fatto si sa che cos avverr. Invece, se si volesse dimostrare, per esempio, che il vischio amaro, sarebbe un'impresa estremamente ardua. Bisognerebbe, dopo essersi informati sulle impressioni che produce su ciascuno dei nostri sensi, dire: l'amaro dolce agli occhi, ma amaro al palato; il vischio quindi non pu essere dolce, poich, se fosse tale, lo si vedrebbe immediatamente; ma siccome non dolce, deve essere amaro. Ora, se mi consentirai di parlare con meno precisione, credo che la mia spiegazione diventer pi facile da intendere. Io dunque considero tutti i concetti (idee) come essere. Cos ad esempio la figura retta un essere, ma la sua immagine non che un'apparenza. Come potrei porre sotto gli occhi di te quell'essere ideale, se prima non avessi, mediante le parole, reso evidente anche l'idea stessa? +Time setting: 1950s" "Suppose I take a hypothesis like this: 'All men are mortal.' Then you will admit that the next step must be to find some man who is not mortal, and prove that he is not. Otherwise there's no sense in making the hypothesis."""" That's what you say,"" said Socrates, ""but I have a feeling it's just a trick of yours."""" I'm glad you noticed that,"" said Glaucon. ""It's a good trick, isn't it? If you can get your opponent to make an assumption which has no meaning, then you've got him on the run, haven't you?"""" Yes, but it won't do me any harm if I see through it."" What we're going to try to do is to find out how many kinds of hypotheses there are. When we've done that we'll know whether it's safe or not to assume things we don't know."""" All right,"" said Socrates, ""let's start. I suppose we'll begin with the kind of hypothesis you find in astronomy, physics and all that sort of thing."""" We certainly shall,"" said Glaucon, ""but for the moment I want you to think about another sort of hypothesis; namely, the ones you find in detective stories."""" You mean, when they make up a list of suspects and then go round trying to prove that each one of them did it?"" Well,"" said Glaucon, ""you can see at once that you have to assume something you don't know. But it's quite different from the sort of hypothesis you find in astronomy. Take, for example, Kepler's first law, that planets move about the sun in ellipses with the sun at one focus. Is that an assumption?"""" No,"" said Socrates, ""it's an observation. It's a statement of fact. If it weren't true, the whole of astronomy would fall to pieces."""" And yet it's still a hypothesis,"" said Glaucon, ""because you can't prove it by deduction from anything else. In order to check it, you have to go back to observation again, and see whether the planets really do behave in that way. And even then you can't be sure, because you may have made a mistake in your observation. So the best you can say is that it appears to be true. The same applies to Newton's laws of motion. They appear to be true, but you can never be absolutely certain. You have to keep checking your theory against observation, and you may find you've got to modify it in various ways."""" I see,"" said Socrates. ""So you'd say that science is a sort of continual guessing."""" Yes,"" said Glaucon, ""that's probably as near as you can get to the truth. Science is always making guesses, and testing them, and correcting them. The important thing is to make sure that your guess is reasonable in itself, and that you have some reason to think it's likely to be true."""" " 101 101 "I see. And do you see, I said, men passing along the wall carrying all sortsof vessels, and statues and figures of animals made of wood and stoneand various materials, which appear over the wall? Some of them aretalking, others silent. You have shown me a strange image, and they are strange prisoners. Like ourselves, I replied; and they see only their own shadows, orthe shadows of one another, which the fire throws on the oppositewall of the cave? @@ -2552,17 +2552,17 @@ Clearly, he said, he would first see the sun and then reason abouthim. And when he remembered his old habitation, and the wisdom of the denand his fellow-prisoners, do you not suppose that he would felicitatehimself on the change, and pity them?" "Summary: The narrator describes a group of prisoners who have been trapped in a cave their entire lives, only seeing the shadows of objects on the wall. They are released and gradually adjust to the outside world. Trope: Allegory Narrative arc: Transformation -Enunciation: Third-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Narrator, prisoners -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" In a minute he had the light, and we started to run. The walls were high and we couldn’t climb them; they were smooth and we couldn’t get a hand-hold. I tried it with my knife, but it just slid along the surface. We beat on the wall and shouted, but there wasn’t any answer. “We’re trapped,” I said. He nodded. “I guess so.” We stood around for a minute or two, listening, trying to think of something else to do. Then we sat down. It was dark and quiet and we were tired from running. So we sat in the dark and waited. For how long I don’t know. It might have been hours. Suddenly I saw the light. A thin shaft of white came through one of the bars. It was bright and clear and steady. I got up and walked over to it. There was no window that I could see. The light seemed to be coming from somewhere above us. I looked up and saw a little hole at the top of the wall. Somebody was looking through it. I waved my hand and yelled. After a while somebody down below began speaking to me. They wanted to know who we were and what we were doing there. I told them about the cave-in and they sent up a rope. When we were safely on the ground they led us out into the open. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "It was a dark, harsh cave. The walls were slimy and damp, and the only light came from a small opening in the ceiling high above us. As my eyes became accustomed to the gloom I made out the forms of three men huddled on the floor. They wore nothing but ragged underclothing, and they crouched there like animals. In fact, they looked more like wild beasts than human beings; their faces were covered with long, matted hair, and their bodies were thin and starved. It gave me a shock to see them so primitive. After all, they had been trapped down here for over half a century. I suppose it must have been difficult to keep civilized."""" That's right,"" said one of the men. ""We've forgotten most of it."" We just want to get out now,"" said the second man. ""Let us out of here."""" Do you know who we are?"" I asked. No,"" they answered together. ""Who are you? What do you want?"""" I am Colonel Lanning, head of MI5,"" I told them. ""I'm here to take you away from this place. You've been prisoners for a long time, but your sentence is over now, and you're free to go."""" We're going where?"" asked the first prisoner. Anywhere you like. London, Paris, New York. It's up to you."""" But we don't know about any of those places,"" said the second prisoner. ""We don't even know what they look like."""" Then let's go outside,"" I suggested. ""You can see things then."""" They looked at each other, and then shook their heads. They're frightened,"" explained the third prisoner. ""They don't know anything about the outside world. They've never seen the sun or felt the wind or heard the birds."""" And they haven't got any clothes,"" I added. ""They'll freeze if we try to take them out like this."""" Well, then, give us some clothes!"" shouted the first prisoner. ""And something to eat! We're starving!"""" I turned to two of the soldiers. Give them some blankets and put some food in their hands,"" I said. ""But don't talk to them; they might bite you."""" The soldiers nodded and went back into the room. There was silence while they prepared the blankets and food. Then they returned. One of them handed a blanket to each of the prisoners, and a large parcel to the third. Eat that,"" he said. ""It's meat pie and custard pudding."""" I watched as the three men tore open the paper and began to stuff the food into their mouths. It was disgusting. Their teeth were black and rotten, and they weren't even careful about washing their hands. But they ate like starved wolves, and before long the parcels were empty. The soldiers cleared away the debris, and then left us alone again. I pulled out my watch and saw that only a few minutes had passed since I had entered the room. " 102 102 "Certainly, he would. And if they were in the habit of conferring honours among themselveson those who were quickest to observe the passing shadows and to remarkwhich of them went before, and which followed after, and which weretogether; and who were therefore best able to draw conclusions asto the future, do you think that he would care for such honours andglories, or envy the possessors of them? Would he not say with Homer, Better to be the poor servant of a poor master, and to endure anything,rather than think as they do and live after their manner? Yes, he said, I think that he would rather suffer anything than entertainthese false notions and live in this miserable manner. @@ -2573,14 +2573,14 @@ I agree, he said, as far as I am able to understand you. Moreover, I said, you must not wonder that those who attain to thisbeatific vision are unwilling to descend to human affairs; for theirsouls are ever hastening into the upper world where they desire todwell; which desire of theirs is very natural, if our allegory maybe trusted. Yes, very natural. And is there anything surprising in one who passes from divine contemplationsto the evil state of man, misbehaving himself in a ridiculous manner;if, while his eyes are blinking and before he has become accustomedto the surrounding darkness, he is compelled to fight in courts oflaw, or in other places, about the images or the shadows of imagesof justice, and is endeavouring to meet the conceptions of those whohave never yet seen absolute justice? Anything but surprising, he replied. Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewildermentsof the eyes are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either fromcoming out of the light or from going into the light, which is trueof the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye; and he whoremembers this when he sees any one whose vision is perplexed andweak, will not be too ready to laugh; he will first ask whether thatsoul of man has come out of the brighter light, and is unable to seebecause unaccustomed to the dark, or having turned from darkness tothe day is dazzled by excess of light. And he will count the one happyin his condition and state of being, and he will pity the other; or,if he have a mind to laugh at the soul which comes from below intothe light, there will be more reason in this than in the laugh whichgreets him who returns from above out of the light into the den." "Summary: The text discusses the nature of knowledge and the pursuit of truth. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical argument -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy -Active character: Socrates, Glaucon" "The person who has knowledge knows his own ignorance, and that's all. Glaucon said: That doesn't sound like much to me. Socrates said: Well, that's about all it is. But there are lots of people who claim to have knowledge when they don't know beans. They think they know something about everything, and therefore they really know nothing at all. I'll bet you've noticed that kind of person yourself. Now if we're going to get anywhere we'd better define what we mean by knowledge. We've got a right to do this; the poet Simonides did it long ago when he said that 'wide is the way and strait the way.' What does he mean by that? How can both ways be wide and the same way strait? He must be talking about two different things. Well, let's find out what they are. Knowledge is justified true belief, isn't it?"""" Glaucon nodded. """"But not every kind of belief,"""" he added. Why not?"" Because some beliefs aren't justifiable. If you believe something without reason then it's superstition and you haven't got knowledge."""" Socrates said: Well, that's a good definition; but in fact there are three kinds of beliefs, and only one of them leads to knowledge. The other two lead nowhere. Do you see why?"""" No."" Because they don't give us any satisfaction. They don't make us happy. You must have noticed that."""" Yes, sir."" So why go after them? Isn't it obvious?"""" Yes, sir."" All right. Now tell me, which kind of belief will give us satisfaction?"""" The kind that's true."" Of course; how could it be otherwise? But what kind of belief is true?"" The kind that comes from having knowledge."" Right again! But what kind of belief comes from having knowledge?"" Only the kind that satisfies our hunger for wisdom."""" That's pretty deep,"" said Glaucon. ""I'm afraid I don't understand. Will you explain it to me?"""" Certainly. You know that everyone wants to be happy, don't you?"" Of course."" And nobody wants to suffer, do they?"" Certainly not."" Well, then, happiness and pleasure are the same thing, aren't they?"" Not always."" Yes, yes, that's true. But what I meant was, happiness is the highest kind of pleasure, isn't it?"""" Oh, certainly."" Well, then, you must have noticed that pleasures come in degrees. Some are very mild and some are violent, don't they?"""" Yes."" Well, then, if you want to enjoy the greatest possible pleasure, won't you go after the most intense kind?"""" No, sir."" Why not?"" Because the more intense it is the shorter it lasts."""" Ah, so you think that the longest-lasting pleasure is the best?"" " +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: Socrates, Glaucon" """""You know what I mean,"""" he said. """"I was not speaking of the knowledge which a man without any special education acquires in quite the ordinary course of life, and which we all possess about the several arts of which the city stands in need, and likewise about the various nature of animals and their habits """" You would be right in saying that we all share in this kind of knowledge ; but the sort of thing you are talking about is not really knowledge at all ; it is only opinion, and accordingly the people who have such opinions only, ought to be called men of opinion, not philosophers. 48 PLATO : Four TRANSLATIONS [] But there is another kind of knowledge which many of us possess, and if we have this we may fairly claim to be called philosophers. And what is this ? Why, knowledge of the nature of absolute good and evil. Now no man who has not studied philosophy can ever attain to this. He may have opinions which are very like the truth, and may even think that he possesses wisdom, but he will never be able to give a reason for his belief that the one is better than the other. Wherefore the possession of such opinions will not make him either a wise man or a lover of wisdom. [ The answer given by Socrates to Glaucon is the same as that which he gives to Polemarchus in Book i., where he says that the lovers of sights and sounds are not philosophers, but only their imitators. Here, however, the distinction between the two classes of persons is made more definite. In the case of the lovers of sights and sounds the absence of philosophy consists in the fact that they do not care for the beauty of virtue, but only for the beauty of the outward form. In the present passage the absence of philosophy is defined as an inability to give reasons for one's beliefs. Glaucon seems to think that this is too severe a test, and so he proceeds to ask whether a man who can give a reason for preferring the just life to the unjust may not be considered to have attained to some degree of wisdom. ] GLAUCON 49 ^ It is possible, however, that the question may be asked in another form which may lead to a different answer. Suppose, then, that a man were to say: "" When I hear a person praising justice and maintaining that it is best of all things for a man to possess, I am willing to admit that he is right, because I perceive that when men act justly towards one another, and obey the laws of the state, and do what is right, everything always goes well with them in their houses and families, and also in the state generally; but when they break the laws and commit crimes, they bring upon themselves many troubles and sorrows, both in private life and in public affairs. " 103 103 "That, he said, is a very just distinction. But then, if I am right, certain professors of education must be wrongwhen they say that they can put a knowledge into the soul which wasnot there before, like sight into blind eyes. They undoubtedly say this, he replied. Whereas, our argument shows that the power and capacity of learningexists in the soul already; and that just as the eye was unable toturn from darkness to light without the whole body, so too the instrumentof knowledge can only by the movement of the whole soul be turnedfrom the world of becoming into that of being, and learn by degreesto endure the sight of being, and of the brightest and best of being,or in other words, of the good. Very true. And must there not be some art which will effect conversion in theeasiest and quickest manner; not implanting the faculty of sight,for that exists already, but has been turned in the wrong direction,and is looking away from the truth? @@ -2592,14 +2592,14 @@ What do you mean? I mean that they remain in the upper world: but this must not But is not this unjust? he said; ought we to give them a worse life,when they might have a better? You have again forgotten, my friend, I said, the intention of thelegislator, who did not aim at making any one class in the State happyabove the rest; the happiness was to be in the whole State, and heheld the citizens together by persuasion and necessity, making thembenefactors of the State, and therefore benefactors of one another;to this end he created them, not to please themselves, but to be hisinstruments in binding up the State." "Summary: The text discusses the nature of knowledge and education, arguing that knowledge exists within the soul but needs to be turned towards truth and goodness. Narrative arc: Philosophical argument -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Plato's philosophy -Active character: The speaker and his interlocutor" But you were afraid to look into your own soul, and see what knowledge is really like, and how it comes into the world. And if this was the reason, you have done quite reasonably; for learning about the nature of knowledge is no easy matter. The difficulty is not that there is any complexity in the question, but that there is none. It is the very simplicity and obviousness of the answer which makes it so hard for us to see it at all. Suppose you had never seen a young man or woman in love; suppose you had never seen lovers kissing, holding one another's hands, gazing at one another; suppose further that you heard a young man saying to an old one: 'I am in love with a person who is very beautiful,' and that you saw the old man replying 'Yes, I know he is very beautiful. But tell me, do you know what beauty really is?' Would you ever be able to understand the conversation? Not unless you had already realised the truth which the old man was trying to make clear to the young one. Knowledge is like Beauty. Few people realise just how much it means. We go through life thinking we know things, when we have only a tiny corner of them mapped out. If we could only grasp even the outlines of our ignorance, we should be well on the way towards knowing something worth knowing. But now take a step farther back and consider the educational problem as a whole. You are always complaining that education nowadays is too bookish, that boys are taught nothing about horses and dogs and cows, that they are not sent out to learn to handle tools or make fires or climb trees; and you blame the modern spirit which reduces everything to books. But your own philosophy implies that these complaints are mistaken. For according to your philosophy, knowledge is a thing within the soul, and can exist nowhere else. If education consists in the growth of knowledge, it must mean the growth of that which is within. And what could be more absurd than to suppose that knowledge grows by adding to itself things which are outside it? If you want to increase your knowledge of Greek history, you will not do so by adding some new bricks to the house, or some more sugar to the tea-cup; the knowledge will come from inside you. If, then, the boy must learn to make fires, and to climb trees, and to milk the cows, let him learn these things, not because they are useful, but because they are good for his character. Let him milk the cows because he enjoys milking them, because he loves animals, because he has learnt to care for their comfort, because he feels kindly towards them, because he has been taught to be gentle and patient. In short, let him milk them because this is what his soul wants to do. +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: The speaker and his interlocutor" "I suppose you believe that it's in the soul, yes?"" Yes. You're right, I do."" Then that's all there is to say about it. Knowledge exists. It's there, and it can't be got rid of."""" But if you've got a big pile of knowledge in your soul,"" persisted the other, ""how come you can't use it?"""" Because it isn't turned towards truth and goodness,"""" answered the first voice harshly. """"It's turned towards sin and falsehood, and that's why it can't see anything else."""" Well, what makes it like that?"" asked the other curiously. ""Why don't it turn round by itself?"""" Because man's nature is evil,"" said the voice shortly. ""If it were good, it wouldn't need to turn round at all; but as it is, it has to be made to turn round, and it's very hard work. If people could only get their minds off sex, they might learn a lot more easily."""" The second voice was silent for a moment, then he said: """"Look here! Do you mean to tell me that it's sex that keeps people from learning things?"""" Of course I do."" Well, if you know that,"" said his companion thoughtfully, ""why don't you get them to talk about something else?"""" There's plenty of time for that when they've learned everything else,"" replied the first voice sharply. """"No, this isn't the kind of stuff that gets talked about in public."""" Why not?"" Because you can't talk about it without sinning against the spirit of the age. People nowadays are so damned ignorant that they simply can't understand any subject unless it's presented in a vulgar and ridiculous light. Take all the subjects that you know best. " 104 104 "True, he said, I had forgotten. Observe, Glaucon, that there will be no injustice in compelling ourphilosophers to have a care and providence of others; we shall explainto them that in other States, men of their class are not obliged toshare in the toils of politics: and this is reasonable, for they growup at their own sweet will, and the government would rather not havethem. Being self-taught, they cannot be expected to show any gratitudefor a culture which they have never received. But we have broughtyou into the world to be rulers of the hive, kings of yourselves andof the other citizens, and have educated you far better and more perfectlythan they have been educated, and you are better able to share inthe double duty. Wherefore each of you, when his turn comes, mustgo down to the general underground abode, and get the habit of seeingin the dark. When you have acquired the habit, you will see ten thousandtimes better than the inhabitants of the den, and you will know whatthe several images are, and what they represent, because you haveseen the beautiful and just and good in their truth. And thus ourState which is also yours will be a reality, and not a dream only,and will be administered in a spirit unlike that of other States,in which men fight with one another about shadows only and are distractedin the struggle for power, which in their eyes is a great good. Whereasthe truth is that the State in which the rulers are most reluctantto govern is always the best and most quietly governed, and the Statein which they are most eager, the worst. Quite true, he replied. And will our pupils, when they hear this, refuse to take their turnat the toils of State, when they are allowed to spend the greaterpart of their time with one another in the heavenly light? Impossible, he answered; for they are just men, and the commands whichwe impose upon them are just; there can be no doubt that every oneof them will take office as a stern necessity, and not after the fashionof our present rulers of State. @@ -2611,16 +2611,16 @@ They are the men, and I will choose them, he replied. And now shall we consider By all means, he replied. The process, I said, is not the turning over of an oyster-shell, butthe turning round of a soul passing from a day which is little betterthan night to the true day of being, that is, the ascent from below,which we affirm to be true philosophy? Quite so. And should we not enquire what sort of knowledge has the power ofeffecting such a change? Certainly. What sort of knowledge is there which would draw the soul from becomingto being? And another consideration has just occurred to me: You willremember that our young men are to be warrior athletes" "Summary: The text discusses the role of philosophers in society and the importance of education for rulers. -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters, Glaucon and the narrator -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical discussion -Literary movement: Platonism +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Glaucon, the narrator -Time setting: Contemporary -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "I don't mind telling you that when I first saw your eye in the peephole I was afraid of philosophers. But I'm beginning to like them better now. They're much more human."""" What's the matter with them?"" said Glaucon. ""They're so damned superhuman,"" said the narrator, ""that they have no sense of humor."" Well, I certainly admit that philosophers do talk a lot of rot,"""" said Glaucon. """"But you can't expect a man who has been thinking all his life about the nature of Reality and the Meaning of Existence to be very entertaining at dinner-parties."""" No; but you'd think they might know enough to keep their mouths shut, wouldn't you?"""" Well, it's true,"" said Glaucon, ""that some of them are like that; but others are quite charming men, really. Of course they have queer views about things, and sometimes when I listen to them I wonder if there isn't something wrong somewhere or other. But then I'm only an ordinary mortal, and I suppose what they say sounds quite reasonable enough to them. You see, these fellows have always had too much time on their hands. That's why they're called 'idle' thinkers, isn't it?"""" Idle? That's hardly the word,"" said the narrator. ""It's more as if they were overworked. An idle man is just a loafer who doesn't care for anything but his pipe and his beer; whereas a philosopher spends his whole time in thinking about problems which most people never even hear of."""" Oh, well, I daresay that explains it,"" said Glaucon. ""It does explain one thing, certainly. For they always seem to me to be dreadfully solemn over nothing at all."""" The reason for that,"" said the narrator, ""is that a philosopher takes himself far too seriously. He thinks that the things he talks about are of vital importance to the State and the World at large, whereas, as a matter of fact, nobody cares two straws about them except himself. And then he tries to convert the rest of mankind, and succeeds in making himself disagreeable. It's just like those missionaries from Africa or India or some such place who go about trying to convert people to their own particular brand of religion. If a man wants to live his own life in his own way, and let other people do the same, why should he bother about whether Christ was born of a virgin or not? It's none of his business."""" No; but supposing,"" said Glaucon, ""that this religion teaches him to lead a better life? Why shouldn't he try to spread that among his fellow-men?"""" Because,"" said the narrator, ""it will almost certainly make him a worse man himself, and it may prevent him from doing good work in his proper sphere. He's likely to become narrow-minded, self-righteous, and intolerant, and he'll probably waste his time proselytising instead of getting on with his job. " +Time setting: 1950s +Diegetic time: A few minutes" The philosophers will be kings, and the kings philosophers. For they will need to have no other education than this. They must live together, and their life is to be devoted to philosophy, and the result of their lives will be to become fit rulers of the State. “Glaucon,” I said, “there are few persons who would agree with you.” “Then we must tell them what they do not know.” “That is what I am afraid of.” “What do you mean?” “You are very bold, Glaucon; yet, if I remember rightly, when you were younger, Thrasymachus the Orator said to you in my presence that you never had the courage to admit an opponent’s arguments, because you wanted to win.” “He thought so himself,” I replied; “but I did not think so.” “I cannot deny it, he certainly did think so.” “However,” I said, “suppose that some god made us noble and fine and virtuous—that is what justice is. If you asked them whether they would rather live as hounds or as lions, I believe that they would say that they would rather be human.” “Yes, I too believe that they would say so.” “Well then, having spoken thus they would surely refuse to live like hounds?” “Certainly.” “Then having chosen to be human instead of hounds or any other animals, are you not ashamed of thus losing the qualities which would make the animals like you? Do you see that in other sorts of life and nature there is one principle which prevents food from puttingrefrigeration frigo congelatore 60 cm professional refrigerazione industriale da cucina, freezer per ristorante e bar, minifrigoriferi per negozi di alimentari e panetterie, frigoriferi per supermercati e ipermercati, sistemi di distribuzione automatica per frigoriferi, refrigeranti per frigoriferi, condotti di scarico per frigoriferi, accessori per frigoriferi, ventilatori industriali, camini a gas, forni a legna, camini elettrici, tubature, cisterne, serbatoi, impianti di riscaldamento, comignoli, inceneritori, focolari, focolai, fornelli, stufe, termosifoni, radiatori, serbatoi idrici, serbatoi a benzina, serbatoi di olio combustibile, serbatoi per liquidi, serbatoi per veleni, pozzi neri, pozzi d’acqua, impianti di pompe per acqua, bombole di gas, compressori, compressori ad aria compressa, generatori di aria compressa, generatori ad aria compressa, impianti di aria compressa, caldaie ad olio, caldaie a vapore, caldaie a gas, caldaie a legna, caldaie elettriche, caldaie centralizzate, caldaie centrali, caldaie per magazzini, scambiatori di calore, recuperatori di calore, impianto di condizionamento d’aria, impianto di climatizzazione, impianto di climatizzazione industriale, impianto di raffrescamento, impianto di raffreddamento, impianto di aria condizionata, impianto di riscaldamento, impianto di riscaldamento industriale, impianto di riscaldamento centrale, impianto di riscaldamento per magazzino, impianto di climatizzazione per magazzino, impianto di raffrescamento per magazzino, impianto di raffreddamento per magazzino, impianto di aria condizionata per magazzino, impianto di riscaldamento per magazzino, impianto di riscaldamento centrale per magazzino, condutture, canalizzazioni, tubature, sistemi di trasmissione del vapore, condotti di scarico, aspiratori, ventilatori, apparecchi di ventilazione, ventilatori industriali, ventilatori ad alta pressione, ventilatori ad alte prestazioni, ventilatori ad asse verticale, ventilatori ad asse orizzontale, ventilatori portatubi, ventilatori sospesi, ventilatori a soffitto, ventilatori ad elica, ventilatori axiali, ventilatori radiali, ventilatori a pale, ventilatori a casco, ventilatori per sale riunioni, ventilatori per sale convegni, ventilatori per sale prove, ventilatori per garage, ventilatori per officine, ventilatori per impianti industriali, ventilatori per capannoni, ventilatori industriali per industria alimentare, ventilatori industriali per industria meccanica, ventilatori industriali per industria chimica, ventilatori industriali per industria tessile, ventilatori industriali per industria metallurgica, ventilatori industriali per industria elettrica, ventilatori industriali per industria farmaceutica, ventilatori industriali per industria cartaria, ventilatori industriali per industria ceramica, ventilatori industriali per industria del vetro, ventilatori industriali per industria del mobile, ventilatori industriali per industria della plastica, ventilatori industriali per industria delle calzature, ventilatori industriali per industria dei cosmetici, ventilatori industriali per industria della birra, ventilatori industriali per industria degli oli vegetali, ventilatori industriali per industria dell’alimentare, ventilatori industriali per industria dei profumi, ventilatori industriali per industria del tabacco, ventilatori industriali per industria della carta igienica, ventilatori industriali per industria dello zucchero, ventilatori industriali per industria dei gelati, ventilatori industriali per industria dei marmellati, ventilatori industriali per industria dei formaggi, ventilatori industriali per industria dei latticini, ventilatori industriali per industria dei prodotti caseari, ventilatori industriali per industria del burro, ventilatori industriali per industria dei pani, ventilatori industriali per industria dei biscotti, ventilatori industriali per industria dei dolci, ventilatori industriali per industria dei macaroni, ventilatori industriali per industria dei confetti, ventilatori industriali per industria dei miele, ventilatori industriali per industria dei vini, ventilatori industriali per industria dei distillati, ventilatori industriali per industria dei pasticcieri, ventilatori industriali per industria delle conserve, ventilatori industriali per industria dei salumi, ventilatori industriali per industria degli alimentari, ventilatori industriali per industria del legno, ventilatori industriali per industria del legname, ventilatori industriali per industria del mobilificio, ventilatori industriali per industria del legnami, ventilatori industriali per industria del boscaiolo, ventilatori industriali per industria della carpenteria, ventilatori industriali per industria del ferro, ventilatori industriali per industria del metallo, ventilatori industriali per industria della siderurgia, ventilatori industriali per industria del metalmeccanico, ventilatori industriali per industria del ferramenta, ventilatori industriali per industria del fonderia, ventilatori industriali per industria della ghisa, ventilatori industriali per industria dei metalli, ventilatori industriali per industria dei metallurgici, ventilatori industriali per industria dei metallurgici strumentali, ventilatori industriali per industria dei metalli preziosi, ventilatori industriali per industria dei metalli non-ferrosi, ventilatori industriali per industria delle bonifiche, ventilatori industriali per industria dei rivestimenti, ventilatori industriali per industria del legno-laccato, ventilatori industriali per industria del legno-pitturato, ventilatori industriali per industria delle vernici, ventilatori industriali per industria dei colori, ventilatori industriali per industria della carta, ventilatori industriali per industria del cartone, ventilatori industriali per industria della cartoleria, ventilatori industriali per industria della cartapesta, ventilatori industriali per industria del cartone-plastica, ventilatori industriali per industria del cartongesso, ventilatori industriali per industria del cartongesso-gesso, ventilatori industriali per industria del cartongesso-cartone, ventilatori industriali per industria del cartongesso-cartoncella, ventilatori industriali per industria dei materiali isolanti, ventilatori industriali per industria delle canne, ventilatori industriali per industria dei tubi, ventilatori industriali per industria dei fili, ventilatori industriali per industria dei cavi, ventilatori industriali per industria dei telai, ventilatori industriali per industria dei tessuti, ventilatori industriali per industria della seta, ventilatori industriali per industria del cotone, ventilatori industriali per industria della lana, ventilatori industriali per industria dei panni, ventilatori industriali per industria dei panni sporchi, ventilatori industriali per industria dei tappeti, ventilatori industriali per industria dei tappeti orientali, ventilatori industriali per industria dei tappeti di moquette, ventilatori industriali per industria dei tappeti di peluche, ventilatori industriali per industria dei tappeti di corda, ventilatori industriali per industria dei tappeti di feltro, ventilatori industriali per industria del velluto, ventilatori industriali per industria del parquet, ventilatori industriali per industria della gomma, ventilatori industriali per industria degli pneumatici, ventilatori industriali per industria dei guanti, ventilatori industriali per industria dei corsetti, ventilatori industriali per industria dei cappelli, ventilatori industriali per industria delle cinture, ventilatori industriali per industria delle camicie, ventilatori industriali per industria degli abiti, ventilatori industriali per industria dei vestiti, ventilatori industriali per industria delle valigie, ventilatori industriali per industria delle borse, ventilatori industriali per industria delle scarpe, ventilatori industriali per industria delle ciabatte, ventilatori industriali per industria delle calze, ventilatori industriali per industria delle mutande, ventilatori industriali per industria delle cravatte, ventilatori industriali per industria delle cinghie, ventilatori industriali per industria dei cuscini, ventilatori industriali per industria dei materassi, ventilatori industriali per industria degli arredi, ventilatori industriali per industria degli arredamenti, ventilatori industriali per industria delle sedie, ventilatori industriali per industria dei divani, ventilatori industriali per industria dei tavolini, ventilatori industriali per industria dei mobili, ventilatori industriali per industria delle poltrone, ventilatori industriali per industria dei camerini, ventilatori industriali per industria dei guardaroba, ventilatori industriali per industria delle tende, ventilatori industriali per industria dei teli, ventilatori industriali per industria della biancheria, ventilatori industriali per industria del bucato, ventilatori industriali per industria del lavaggio, ventilatori industriali per industria della concia, ventilatori industriali per industria delle concerie, ventilatori industriali per industria dei cuoio, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-vestiario, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-fabbricato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-legno, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-metallizzato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-tela, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-cartone, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-carta, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-laminato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-polimerico, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-resina, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-composito, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-plastico, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-rivestito, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-marmorizzato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-paraffinato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-saponificato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-polverizzato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-smaltato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-imbullonato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-verniciato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-sfoderato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-vellutato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-finestrato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-alluminato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-fibrorinforzato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-risottintegerrito, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-integerrito, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-aromatizzato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-oleato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-antiossidato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-decolorato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-molato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-iridato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-rameggiato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-brossato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-argentato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-argenteggiato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-argento-molato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-orologeri, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-oro-molato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-platino-molato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-bronzo-molato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-nichelato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-pigmentato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-perlatto, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-diamantato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-microscopico, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-nano-strutturato, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-polimerico, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-sintetico, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-artificiale, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-sintetico-natural, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-sintetico-naturale, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-naturale, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-naturale-sintetico, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-naturale-sintetico-naturale, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-sintetico-naturale-sintetico, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-sintetico-naturale-sintetico-naturale, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-sintetico-sintetico, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-sintetico-sintetico-naturale, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-sintetico-sintetico-naturale-sintetico, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-sintetico-sintetico-sintetico, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-sintetico-sintetico-sintetico-naturale, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-naturale-naturale, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-naturale-naturale-sintetico, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-naturale-naturale-sintetico-naturale, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-naturale-naturale-sintetico-sintetico, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-naturale-naturale-sintetico-sintetico-naturale, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-naturale-sintetico-naturale-sintetico, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-naturale-sintetico-naturale-sintetico-naturale, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-naturale-sintetico-naturale-sintetico-sintetico, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-naturale-sintetico-naturale-sintetico-sintetico-naturale, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-naturale-sintetico-sintetico-naturale, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-naturale-sintetico-sintetico-naturale-sintetico, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-naturale-sintetico-sintetico-naturale-sintetico-naturale, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-naturale-sintetico-sintetico-naturale-sintetico-sintetico, ventilatori industriali per industria del cuoio-naturale-sintetico-sintetico-naturale-sintetico 105 105 "Yes, that was said. Then this new kind of knowledge must have an additional quality? What quality? Usefulness in war. Yes, if possible. There were two parts in our former scheme of education, were therenot? Just so. There was gymnastic which presided over the growth and decay of thebody, and may therefore be regarded as having to do with generationand corruption? @@ -2642,15 +2642,15 @@ Will you explain your meaning? he said. I will try, I said; and I wish you would Explain, he said. I mean to say that objects of sense are of two kinds; some of themdo not invite thought because the sense is an adequate judge of them;while in the case of other objects sense is so untrustworthy thatfurther enquiry is imperatively demanded. You are clearly referring, he said, to the manner in which the sensesare imposed upon by distance, and by painting in light and shade." "Summary: The text discusses the importance of knowledge and education, specifically focusing on music and arithmetic. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonism +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Glaucon -Quoted character: Agamemnon, Palamedes" Ei, ei! Mit der Musik ist es doch nicht anders. Ein Mann, dem die Harmonie fehlt, ist ein Ungeheuer. Wie soll man aus einem solchen einen guten Musiklehrer machen? Der Knabe mu erst ein Freund werden, ehe er es versteht, das Geigen zu lernen. Bei der Rechnung ist's wiederum ebenso. Die schne Sprache der Zahlen hrt man gar nicht, wenn sie im Kopfe summt und nicht herausklingt. Aus sich selbst lernt der Mensch nichts. Er hat die Wahrheit in sich, aber keine Seele, um ihn berzeugen zu knnen; und diese mu daher von auen kommen. Ja, ja, Glaucon, da du dich einmal darber recht besinnst, so wirst du dir sagen: 'Der Unterricht wird unsrer Jugend zum besten.' Aber wir wollen jetzt davon lassen. Glaubst du, da ein vernnftiger Mensch dem jungen Palamedes glauben wrde, da Agamemnon den Trojanern das Feuer gegeben habe? Nein, das glaube ich nicht. Warum denn? Man mchte doch wohl meinen, die Geschichte sei glaubwrdig genug. Weil man nicht wei, ob er es getan hat. Oder doch, Freund, oder doch! Denn sonst htten sie ihm's nicht so lange nachgetragen. Das bezweifle ich. Denn wenn etwas geschieht, das dem Verdacht eines Verbrechens nahe kommt, so sind wir neugierige Menschen, und wir suchen nach Beweisen fr das, was wir schon gesehn haben. So war's auch bei mir, als ich mich nach der Jugend befrchtete. Ich dachte: 'Das Schlimmste ist mglich.' Und nun suchte ich nach Zeichen. Recht gut! Was fandest du? Da ich auf dem Marktplatz sa, kam mir ein Hndler entgegen, der mehrere Fischreihen auf dem Rcken trug. Da ging mir's auf einmal wie ein Licht auf. War's denn weit hergehend? Nicht sehr. Ich sah, da die Fische noch bluteten. Aha! Damit ist's klar. Nun, ich dachte, da jeder Mensch, der Blut vergiet, mordet. Da wurde mir ganz elend. War's denn nher zusammen, als zur Kche gegangen ist? Es ist mir nicht sicher. Da magst du recht haben. Woher wissen wir denn, ob nicht alle Leute, die sich an Mord versuchten, ihre Opfer schlachten? Das ist zwar unwahrscheinlich. Ja, aber eben, weil es unwahrscheinlich ist, kann man's noch nicht ausschlieen. +Quoted character: Agamemnon, Palamedes" "Que alarde de conocimientos!... Y Agamenon, que era un pobre diablo, no sabia nada. S, ya lo creo! El otro, el ministro, se lo dijo a Glaucon: """"Palamedes es demasiado inteligente para tu padre"""". Porque Palamedes haba inventado la aritmtica y todas esas cosas que luego aprendieron los dems; pero a tu padre no le gustaba, porque desconfiaba de l. Ya me entenda usted, eh? Se abalanz a la puerta, aporre la aldaba, llamo, dio voces. La servidora de confianza vino a abrirle con cara de susto. Qu te pasa? qu quieres? pregunt . Nada, nada. Quiero ver al amo, a mi patrn. Est en el estudio, si quiere subir. Subi las escaleras, entr en la biblioteca, donde estaban sentados otros dos hombres. Un viejo, calvo, estaba escribiendo en una mesa; el otro, jovenzuelo, de pelo y barba crespo, miraba por la ventana. Ambos se levantaron al entrar l. Es curioso como todos los que me ven se ponen de pie. En seguida supuso que eran profesores. Es verdad. El mayor, de uniforme acadmico, era profesor de Letras; el jven, de pelo colorado, con chaqueta de franela, lentes, bigote de cholo, iba a ser mdico. Hace muchos aos fu a estudiar a París. Le llamaban Numa, porque tena un hermano pequeo que se llamaba Rmulo. Los dos solos tenan ms talento que todo el pas reunido. Su padre los trataba como a bestias. Estudiaban sin querer y salan malos. Por eso les gritaba tanto. El viejo se quedo mirndole fijamente. No te conozco, dijo . Soy un amigo de tu hijo, contest Numa . Siempre le han ido bien las cosas, pero ahora va a sufrir mucho. Pues ve a saberlo, que tampoco lo sabe l. Abri la puerta de su gabinete. Era una habitacin grande, iluminada por un solo cristal, cuya luz caa horizontalmente sobre un escritorio de madera clara, cubierto de libros, y una silla de ruedas, con el asiento y respaldo tapizados de cuero negro. Sentse en un silln y se encendió un cigarro. Habl en voz baja, como si temiera que sus palabras fueran oidas por alguien. Entonces Numa dijo: Cmo lo ha hecho? Dicen que se lo ha llevado con la fuerza... Me parece que es mejor que no digamos nada. Todo lo que ha pasado no debe salir de aqu. Es preferible que crea que se ha marchado por su voluntad. Eso le har daos; pero no tendr miedo ni angor. Maestro, esa es una gran idea. Voy a decirle que venga. Numa se march, dejndoles solos. El viejo se puso a dar vueltas por la sala, con la pipa entre los dientes. Despus volvi a sentarse a su mesa. Va usted a ver, pens , ahora voy a tener que hacerle caso. Pero no quiero que piense que soy bueno. Algn da le meter a palos, aunque sea de coartarle. Quedmos en eso. As quedamos. " 106 106 "No, I said, that is not at all my meaning. Then what is your meaning? When speaking of uninviting objects, I mean those which do not passfrom one sensation to the opposite; inviting objects are those whichdo; in this latter case the sense coming upon the object, whetherat a distance or near, gives no more vivid idea of anything in particularthan of its opposite. An illustration will make my meaning clearer:--here are three fingers --a little finger, a second finger, and amiddle finger. Very good. You may suppose that they are seen quite close: And here comes thepoint. What is it? Each of them equally appears a finger, whether seen in the middleor at the extremity, whether white or black, or thick or thin --itmakes no difference; a finger is a finger all the same. In these casesa man is not compelled to ask of thought the question, what is a finger?for the sight never intimates to the mind that a finger is other thana finger. @@ -2670,15 +2670,15 @@ I understand, he said, and agree with you. And to which class do unity and numbe And surely, he said, this occurs notably in the case of one; for wesee the same thing to be both one and infinite in multitude? Yes, I said; and this being true of one must be equally true of allnumber? Certainly. And all arithmetic and calculation have to do with number?" "Summary: The speaker discusses how certain objects and sensations do not provide clear ideas, leading to confusion and a desire for understanding. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The speaker and the person being spoken to -Time setting: Contemporary" “Gee, that’s tough. The guy must have been nuts.” “I don’t think so,” I said. “It was a very clear and reasonable idea. Only it wasn’t about anything we can see or touch or hear or smell. It’s like trying to describe how you feel when you’re in pain. Take this pencil for instance. What do you know about it?” “I know it’s a pencil.” “No; that isn’t enough. You can see it’s a pencil. But what does ‘pencil’ mean? You can’t really tell me what it is, just from looking at it, can you? You only know it by the ideas you have of it. The shape, for instance. That doesn’t tell you much. It could be a stick of dynamite. Or it could be a toothpick. Or it could be a lead pencil, which is something quite different. And even if it is a lead pencil, that still doesn’t tell you much. It might be a piece of charcoal. It might be a propelling pencil. Or it might be an ordinary lead pencil, which is something else again. Now take a coin. A quarter, say. How do you know it’s a quarter?” “I weigh it.” “Yes; but how do you know how much it weighs? And how do you know what weight makes it a quarter, instead of a half dollar or a dime? You couldn’t weigh them all, because there are millions of them. So you have to use another coin you already know. And how did you know that one? Because you knew the one before it, and that one before that one, and so on. And where did it all begin? Who made the first penny, and how did he know how big it should be? And who made the first sheep, and how did they know that four legs were better than six? It’s very confusing, isn’t it?” “You’ve got me there,” said Cugat. He looked at me thoughtfully. “Are you sure you’re not Greek?” he asked. “I don’t think so,” I said. “I’m afraid I’m too raw for that. And besides, I’m a newspaper man.” “But you’ve been reading a lot of Plato lately, haven’t you?” “A little.” “Then you realize that what you’ve just been saying is the essence of his philosophy?” “The essence?” I considered it carefully. “Well, maybe. Only I don’t think Plato ever talked about sheep.” “He didn’t have to,” said Cugat. “Sheep are obvious. They illustrate his whole theory.” “Oh,” I said. “And what’s his theory?” “That nothing is what it seems to be. Everything is something else.” “That’s pretty hard to believe,” I said. “Take a tree, for instance. I don’t see how you can make a tree into something else without taking it apart. I think I’d like to go over to the Greek Taverna and talk this thing out. +Time setting: 1950s" "I do not understand what you mean by a 'clear idea of a line'. You may as well try to give me a clear idea of blue. Neither of these ideas exist apart from their causes."" ""Good Lord!"" I cried, ""what nonsense you talk! There is such a thing as the sensation of blue, and there is such a thing as a line."""" ""Quite so! And when the blue which you see on the wall has been produced by a light ray which is itself blue, then you have a correspondence between the sensation and its cause. But in the case of a line you have no such correspondence. The sensation of straightness depends upon two or more points being taken at one time in relation to each other. In order that you may have a line you must first have the brain cells which are concerned with vision, and these brain cells are affected simultaneously by two or more rays of light. The sensation of straightness can only be given when these rays are compared. When you look at a straight line, therefore, you are really comparing the sensations which result from two groups of light rays. You say that you 'see' the straightness, but what you really do is to compare your visual sensations and to judge that they are similar. It is only by judging thus that you can ever arrive at an accurate knowledge of anything."""" ""If all this is true,"" I said, ""then how do we know that a straight line is a straight line?"""" ""You do not. That is why I say that it is useless to argue from the actual appearance of objects. If you take a piece of glass and look through it, you will often find that the image which you get through the glass appears crooked. Does this prove that the glass is crooked? Not at all. What has happened is that your eye has become accustomed to seeing things in a certain way, and now it attempts to interpret the new images according to the old system. The truth is that you cannot trust either your eyes or your judgment of appearances. You must learn to reason from premises which are exact and definite."""" ""It seems to me,"" I answered, ""that you are very near to proving my point. If we cannot trust our eyes or our judgment of appearances, then we are left in a state of complete confusion. How can we ever hope to discover the truth?"""" ""I am coming to that,"" he said. ""First of all, however, I want you to follow the argument just a little further. The next question which I ask myself is this: Can I, by reasoning, arrive at any absolute certainty? If I cannot, then where does all this lead us to?"""" ""I admit that I cannot conceive how human reason can go far beyond the mere accumulation of facts. " 107 107 "Yes. And they appear to lead the mind towards truth? Yes, in a very remarkable manner. Then this is knowledge of the kind for which we are seeking, havinga double use, military and philosophical; for the man of war mustlearn the art of number or he will not know how to array his troops,and the philosopher also, because he has to rise out of the sea ofchange and lay hold of true being, and therefore he must be an arithmetician. That is true. And our guardian is both warrior and philosopher? Certainly. Then this is a kind of knowledge which legislation may fitly prescribe;and we must endeavour to persuade those who are prescribe to be theprincipal men of our State to go and learn arithmetic, not as amateurs,but they must carry on the study until they see the nature of numberswith the mind only; nor again, like merchants or retail-traders, witha view to buying or selling, but for the sake of their military use,and of the soul herself; and because this will be the easiest wayfor her to pass from becoming to truth and being. That is excellent, he said. Yes, I said, and now having spoken of it, I must add how charmingthe science is! and in how many ways it conduces to our desired end,if pursued in the spirit of a philosopher, and not of a shopkeeper! @@ -2694,14 +2694,14 @@ You mean geometry? Exactly so. Clearly, he said, we are concerned with that part Yes, I said, but for that purpose a very little of either geometryor calculation will be enough; the question relates rather to thegreater and more advanced part of geometry --whether that tends inany degree to make more easy the vision of the idea of good; and thither,as I was saying, all things tend which compel the soul to turn hergaze towards that place, where is the full perfection of being, whichshe ought, by all means, to behold. True, he said. Then if geometry compels us to view being, it concerns us; if becomingonly, it does not concern us? Yes, that is what we assert. Yet anybody who has the least acquaintance with geometry will notdeny that such a conception of the science is in flat contradictionto the ordinary language of geometricians." "Summary: The text discusses the importance of arithmetic and geometry in education, arguing that they help the soul to reason and seek truth. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation Active character: Socrates -Time setting: Contemporary" Arithmetike de kai geometrike. Socrates. Ou te pasi ta logismata, ou te peraitei? Alektryon. Oute ena ouk estin; all' houtos ekei epimeinei tou emou paidou. Socrates. Diokete oun oti deipneis kai dianueis di'eipas 'o theos'. Alektryon. Men ouk an legeis? Socrates. Ean me deipneis kai m dianues, eipeis 'ho theos' aneu tou diokontos. Alektryon. Noeis, Theodoros, ouk an pisteus as; ouchi gar ho theos aneu tes matheseos echei logon. Socrates. Iden pollakis an eipeis, Theodoros, alla pros to kath'hemin paraechois. Kineis men gar to onoma tou theou, all' en tais syllogismois epi toiautous ennoeis. Alektryon. Hotan men gar ton theon legoimi, oi noesomen hotan menei, hotan de ouk menei ou noesomen. Socrates. Ti oun touto; ti touto? Alektryon. Kai eipas, 'o theos'? Socrates. Oute touto gar apantesis. Alektryon. Tauta d' eipeis? Socrates. Ison oun hai ten areten kai to kalon atrekesmenae. Alektryon. All' hotan ho theos ouk menei, kakos einai. Socrates. To men eipeis, 'hotan ouk menei', to de, 'kakos einai', ouk eipeis. Alektryon. Pote gar ouk eipeis, 'hotan ouk menei kakos einai?' Socrates. Akribeian ariston apekrithsa. Alektryon. Kai ean ho theos menei, kalos estin? Socrates. Nai. Alektryon. Kalos de eipeis. Socrates. Kallion d' eipein echein. Alektryon. Kai hosper to kalon, houtos kai to agathon estin? Socrates. An ara me kalleseis, me agathon es? Alektryon. Touto gar eipeis, 'houtos kai to kalon estin'? Socrates. Timan de kallein. Alektryon. Kai hosper to kalon, hosper to timion, houtos kai to agathon estin? Socrates. Hosper eipeis, hosper eipeis. Alektryon. To agathon de eipeis. Socrates. Agathon d' eipein echein. Alektryon. Kai hosper to agathon, houtos kai to kalon estin? Socrates. Hosper eipeis, hosper eipeis. Alektryon. De hotan ho theos menei, kalos estin. Socrates. Nai. Alektryon. Kai kalos eipeis. Socrates. Kallion de eipein echein. Alektryon. Kai hosper to kalon, hosper to agathon, houtos kai to theion estin? Socrates. Hosper eipeis, hosper eipeis. Alektryon. To theion de eipeis. Socrates. Theion d' eipein echein. Alektryon. Kai hosper to theion, houtos kai to kalon estin? Socrates. Hosper eipeis, hosper eipeis. Alektryon. Kai hosper to kalon, hosper to theion, houtos kai to agathon estin? Socrates. Hosper eipeis, hosper eipeis. +Time setting: 1950s" Socrates: 1950 era. La matemtica est extraordinariament ben considerada en el nostre pas. Els arxiprests, els metges i els comerciants s'hi estimen tant que no hi poden viure sense ella; i els nens han de saber la geometria per a entrar a l'escola d'oficis. Perqu no voldrien que els estudiants de medicina sabessin la natura del cos hum? No caldria que els periodistes poltics entengussin les lleis? I qu grans comptes de negocis s'haurien de fer sense el mn de totes les figures! Un nen que no sap res de tot puc dir-li, i que vulgui ser policia, ni es pot convertir en un bon home si no fa l'examen. -S, senyor jutge- va dir Xapu -la meva filla ja ha fet l'examen i ha obtingut dues medalles de plata per a la seva conducta. Ho he vist amb els meus ulls i ho far per a ella, si calgu. Vaja, senyor Socrates, que ens estem endurant gaire... -No hi ha res- va dir Socrates -jo mateix tinc una filla que avui dia estudiant la geometria. -Aquesta dona- va continuar Xapu -se'l mena de bell nou... -I qu vol dir aix?... -B, senyor jutge- va dir Xapu -vost, que no s d'aquests costums, no ho entenia. Per sempre que anava a la botiga, el patr de la meva filla li deia: Ves, senyora, altra vegada em canti una caneteta, que m'agradaria molt. Fins que un dia li va fer saber que tenia molts afers a sa casa, i que no tenia temps per cantar. Aleshores, el patr es pos en mans de la justcia i present com a testimoni el doctor Lluci i el noi Joan. Ells van declarar que aquella dona era una bruixa que feia mal als homes. En sentir-ho, el patr va caure de genolls i suplic a la justcia que fos ben indulgent amb ell, que era un home mort, i que encara estava lluitant contra ella. Ja hem vist que no li ha servit de res. Est a punt d'anar-se'n a l'infern i no voldr deixar-me fer cap negoci ms. Li ha contat aix a Socrates? -S, senyor Xapu- va dir Socrates -i et dic que si no tingus cura de tu mateix, et passar el mateix que al teu patr. -Escolti'm, senyor jutge- va dir Xapu, tombant-se cap a mi -a mi, que mai no he fet mal a ning, ni a mi mateix, no m'ha de tractar d'aquesta manera. Si no vol estimar-me, que no m'estimi; per no m'ha de fer xantatge. Vost, que no coneix el meu carcter, no pot entendre res. Tots els habitants de la ciutat m'han conegut des que era infant i han vist que mai no he fet mal a ning. Jo mateix, quan el senyor jutge em pregunta alguna cosa, no puc resistirme a contestar-li, perqu sempre he tingut por a ell. Per ara ja no tremolo ms. -Tremoles, Xapu?- va dir Socrates -no tremoles com una fulla que s'enduu la ventada? -No, senyor jutge- va dir Xapu -ja no tremolo gaire. 108 108 "How so? They have in view practice only, and are always speaking? in a narrowand ridiculous manner, of squaring and extending and applying andthe like --they confuse the necessities of geometry with those ofdaily life; whereas knowledge is the real object of the whole science. Certainly, he said. Then must not a further admission be made? What admission? That the knowledge at which geometry aims is knowledge of the eternal,and not of aught perishing and transient. That, he replied, may be readily allowed, and is true. Then, my noble friend, geometry will draw the soul towards truth,and create the spirit of philosophy, and raise up that which is nowunhappily allowed to fall down. @@ -2719,14 +2719,14 @@ That is true, Socrates; but so little seems to be known as yet aboutthese subjec Why, yes, I said, and for two reasons: --in the first place, no governmentpatronises them; this leads to a want of energy in the pursuit ofthem, and they are difficult; in the second place, students cannotlearn them unless they have a director. But then a director can hardlybe found, and even if he could, as matters now stand, the students,who are very conceited, would not attend to him. That, however, wouldbe otherwise if the whole State became the director of these studiesand gave honour to them; then disciples would want to come, and therewould be continuous and earnest search, and discoveries would be made;since even now, disregarded as they are by the world, and maimed oftheir fair proportions, and although none of their votaries can tellthe use of them, still these studies force their way by their naturalcharm, and very likely, if they had the help of the State, they wouldsome day emerge into light. Yes, he said, there is a remarkable charm in them. But I do not clearlyunderstand the change in the order. First you began with a geometryof plane surfaces? Yes, I said. And you placed astronomy next, and then you made a step backward?" "Summary: The speaker discusses the importance of studying geometry and astronomy for the sake of knowledge and personal improvement. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation Active character: Socrates, interlocutor -Time setting: Contemporary" Not that I pretend to understand it myself. But, as you see, I have a very good teacher, and so shall you have if you go on in the same way.” “But why do you trouble yourself about geometry?” said the other. “Why, don’t you know that when a man has learned his ABC he will find it useful in many ways? You may be sure of this: you can never learn too much; and if you are really anxious for knowledge, you will not grumble at being forced to learn what is useful even though it be dull.” The interlocutor said no more, but seemed rather to reflect within himself. Socrates, after waiting a little while, began again: “Now tell me this, my friend: have you ever heard how Theseus was guided out of the Labyrinth by Ariadne’s thread?” “Yes, often,” said the other. “And did you never think what sort of thread she used?” “No, I had never thought of that.” “Did you suppose that her mother gave her a piece of sewing-thread?” “That would never have lasted long enough.” “True, my friend. And therefore there must have been some thread which could last through any length of time. Now what do you suppose such a thread would be?” “Why, of course, like Ariadne’s thread, it would be the Sun.” “Then you might also say that it is the Sun who guides men through the labyrinth of life. +Time setting: 1950s" “Golly, I’m sorry,” said Socrates. “If I’d known that I would have let you off. It’s just that I’ve never seen a guy who was so completely ignorant of everything that it’s really frightening. I thought if I could work on your brain for half an hour every day for a few months I might get somewhere. But it’s hopeless. You’re like a man who has been living in a cave all his life and then gets out into the sunshine for the first time. Your mind is a blank sheet. If you don’t study geometry now, you’ll spend the rest of your life bumping into things.” “I can see you are a very angry person,” said the interlocutor. “And perhaps I deserved to be snubbed. But after all, we are only men; it is human to make mistakes. And a mistake does not necessarily mean that a man is a fool. I shall try to learn geometry if you wish me to, but I feel that I must point out one thing to you: even if I do learn it, it will be no use to me. There is no money in it. You may say that it is knowledge and therefore worth having for its own sake. But what good is it? How can I live by it?” “That is where you are wrong,” said Socrates. “It is exactly because there is no money in it that it is valuable. Knowledge is more important than money. The man who knows about astronomy or geometry or physics, or who can read Latin, may earn less money than the man who can’t, but he is a better man and commands more respect. He is more intelligent, and intelligence is power. Look at the people who know these things: they are cleverer than other people, they have high social position, they are the people whom everybody wants to imitate. And besides, it is rude not to know things. Imagine yourself in a cinema. Suppose the lights go up and the manager comes out and says ‘Ladies and gentlemen, we regret that owing to an error on the part of our projectionist it has not been possible to show tonight’s programme. Instead of a film we are going to ask Mr Smith to come on the stage and talk to you.’ Now suppose Mr Smith doesn’t know anything to talk about. He is bound to make himself ridiculous. He would be laughed out of the cinema. But if he knew something—geometry, for instance—if he knew how to prove that two angles of a triangle equal two right angles, or something like that, and began talking about it, why, you would listen to him with the greatest interest, provided he spoke clearly and intelligently. The only reason why you didn’t want to hear him talk before is that you thought he wouldn’t know anything. That is why it is important to study geometry, astronomy, Latin, physics, and all that sort of thing. You never know when you are going to be called upon to speak in public, and you ought to be prepared.” 109 109 "Yes, and I have delayed you by my hurry; the ludicrous state of solidgeometry, which, in natural order, should have followed, made me passover this branch and go on to astronomy, or motion of solids. True, he said. Then assuming that the science now omitted would come into existenceif encouraged by the State, let us go on to astronomy, which willbe fourth. The right order, he replied. And now, Socrates, as you rebuked thevulgar manner in which I praised astronomy before, my praise shallbe given in your own spirit. For every one, as I think, must see thatastronomy compels the soul to look upwards and leads us from thisworld to another. @@ -2741,15 +2741,15 @@ I quite agree, though I never thought of this before. Then, I said, in astronomy That, he said, is a work infinitely beyond our present astronomers. Yes, I said; and there are many other things which must also havea similar extension given to them, if our legislation is to be ofany value. But can you tell me of any other suitable study?" "Summary: The text discusses the study of astronomy and its relationship to knowledge. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical conversation -Literary movement: Plato's philosophical school +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, another character speaking with Socrates -Time setting: Contemporary" Ei kyll vaan heidn nkyviss, ei hn sit koskaan tuletkn sinun nkemn. SOKRATES. Tm on toki totta; mutta sen huomaat, ettei se haittaa meidn tiedon etsimme ympristn tmminen ja tmminen. Toiset sitten taasen ajattelevat, ett avaruuden tutkiminen on kaiken muun tiedon perusta. Miksi? Eik siin minua nyt vain thn menness, niinkuin tuosta ennen? Mit voinut tehd, kun sain ajatuksen, ett avaruus on maailman keskimmist pisteen mukaan? Mutta mit jos joku toinen olisi tll hetkell ajattelemaan jotakin muuta, harkitsematta esimerkiksi, mik oli se ensimminen liike, joka loi avaruutta? Mitp juuri sill hetkell? Mit silloin tapahtui ja mik sen aiheutti? Jospa hnet sittenkin kiinnostaisi, mihin puoluetahoihin avaruus jakautuu, minklaisia sen osia on, kuinka paljon niit on ja miten ne toisiaan vaihtelevat? Eik hn saata varmaankaan itsekn siihen perehty, jos pt hnest, ett yksikin seikka tss on tarpeetonta hnelle ja hnen tykylleen. KUNTOHILJAISUUS (hakien hnt). Vai sanotko, ett avaruuden tutkiminen on tarpeetonta? SOKRATES. En min sanonut sit, vaan olen kysellyt sinulta, mit sinun mielipiteesi on siit. KUNTOHILJAISUUS. Minua siis kiinnostaa avaruus eik autuutta etsiminen. SOKRATES. Niin, avaruus. Sen tiedt kuitenkin, ett se on painavaa ja kevytt, ainakin hyvin usein, kuten esimerkiksi hiukkanen ja ruumihiukkanen. Mutta mist se johtuu, ett jotkut asiat ovat kevyit ja jotkut painavia? KUNTOHILJAISUUS. Mit min siit tiedn? SOKRATES. Et tied, ett se johtuu siit, ett yksi ja sama asia on samalla aina sek painavaa ett kevytt? KUNTOHILJAISUUS. Ent oletko varma, ett se on niin? SOKRATES. Tiedn, ett ainakin kaikki, mit tss huoneessamme on, on molempia: on se kevyt ja painava samalla. KUNTOHILJAISUUS. Mit niill on yhteist? SOKRATES. Yksi ja sama asia. KUNTOHILJAISUUS. Onhan se toki totta, ett tuo pyr on yksi ja sama asia molemmilla pin, vaikkei se toki ole yhtenev piirre painavuudessa ja kevyss, vaikka toki raskas ja kevyt eivt ole toisistaan erillisi. SOKRATES. Olet varma, ett se, mik olet tnne tuonut, on yksi ja sama asia molemmilla pin? KUNTOHILJAISUUS. Sit varten minulla on todisteet. SOKRATES. Ja sinulle riittvt? KUNTOHILJAISUUS. Riittvt tahdon min sanoa, jos sin haluat ottaa niin. SOKRATES. Hitaasti hitaasti, istuimen sisltmiseksi... KUNTOHILJAISUUS. +Time setting: 1950s" We are also likely to be told that astronomy, like mathematics and physics, is a deductive science; that it studies the stars by means of instruments constructed on scientific principles; that it is one of the oldest sciences, but that its progress has been greatly retarded by superstitions, for which we must blame the priests. All this may be true or false; I do not know. But I think that most people will agree that, if there is any branch of knowledge which goes back to an early stage in the evolution of human consciousness, then astronomy does so, even though it may have taken a different form from what it has today. I think they will also agree that, if there is any branch of knowledge in which superstition and credulity have been deeply rooted, then astronomy does so, and that they still lurk within it. In these respects it resembles philosophy. Now, as you see, Socrates is studying the heavens with his eyes and with his mind, just as he did in my youth. He is a hard man to argue with, and I have only the vaguest notion of what he was driving at. Yet I am certain of one thing: he was using the old method of Euthyphro; he was trying to shock me out of my prejudices by hitting me between the eyes with vivid facts. And, like Euthyphro, I found myself wincing under his attack. “I don’t know anything about it,” I said at last. “But I don’t mind telling you that I feel a sort of grim satisfaction whenever I hear that some miserable criminal has been hanged for murder, or electrocuted for rape, or burnt at the stake for heresy.” The other man laughed, and then grew serious again. “That’s because you’re a barbarian,” he said. “You have no sense of proportion. You can’t understand that the guilt of a murderer is not the same as the guilt of a mass-murderer, or that the guilt of a mass-murderer is not the same as the guilt of a war-criminal, or that the guilt of a war-criminal is not the same as the guilt of a dictator who starts a world-war, or that the guilt of a dictator is not the same as the guilt of a God who creates millions of men whose sole function is to suffer and die in agony. Do you follow me?” “Not very closely, I’m afraid.” “Well, let me put it another way. Suppose you were condemned to die in the electric chair, and suppose you had the power to transfer your sentence to someone else; would you do it? If you say ‘Yes’, then I am quite sure that you are not a Christian, however pious you may pretend to be. For, according to Christianity, every man is born with Original Sin, and therefore deserves to die for his crimes. 110 110 "No, he said, not without thinking. Motion, I said, has many forms, and not one only; two of them areobvious enough even to wits no better than ours; and there are others,as I imagine, which may be left to wiser persons. But where are the two? There is a second, I said, which is the counterpart of the one alreadynamed. And what may that be? The second, I said, would seem relatively to the ears to be what thefirst is to the eyes; for I conceive that as the eyes are designedto look up at the stars, so are the ears to hear harmonious motions;and these are sister sciences --as the Pythagoreans say, and we, Glaucon,agree with them? @@ -2765,16 +2765,16 @@ What do you mean? I said; the prelude or what? Do you not know thatall this is b Assuredly not, he said; I have hardly ever known a mathematician whowas capable of reasoning. But do you imagine that men who are unable to give and take a reasonwill have the knowledge which we require of them?" "Summary: The speaker discusses the various forms of motion and their relationship to knowledge and understanding. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: First-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonism +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The speaker, Glaucon -Time setting: Contemporary -Diegetic time: A few minutes" But if he can’t do that, the only thing left is a sudden swerve of his head or shoulders, in which case he’s done for. He doesn’t understand the forms at all, so he can’t follow them and he loses the race. He has no knowledge, and as a result his soul becomes mad.” “That’s an odd conclusion,” Glaucon said, smiling. “You might think it was the other way around. Knowledge would be what makes you mad, not ignorance.” “No, because there’s no madness in knowledge. But when someone who has no knowledge acts on impulses he doesn’t understand, then his soul becomes wild. It’s like a man who’s possessed by a god, a man who’s out of his mind. That’s why the Sophists say that we’re always guided by our gods, but they don’t have much sense themselves. The gods are good, and they never make anyone do anything wrong. No, the truth is quite different: the greatest evil comes from us ourselves when we listen to those who control our desires. And this is also the reason why the lovers of sight get so carried away by their desires. They have eyes, and they believe that everything else is made up of shadows, so they go after them, and they become masters over themselves. But the moment they meet something that isn’t just a shadow, they can’t deal with it any more than the rest of us can. Their souls are blind, and their bodies are blind too, so they get lost and lose their bearings. They stumble along, and they can’t see where they’re going, and they become utterly ridiculous. +Time setting: 1950s +Diegetic time: A few minutes" I said, ‘I’m very glad to meet you at last, Glaucon. It’s a long time since we saw each other.’ ‘What do you mean?’ he said. ‘A hundred and fifty years,’ I said. ‘That’s nothing in astronomy,’ he said. ‘You think so,’ I said. ‘Just try it as a form of motion.’ He gave me a hard look. ‘I like your jokes,’ he said, ‘but remember that my brother Plato isn’t here tonight.’ ‘He won’t be needing to hear them,’ I said. ‘He’ll be dead soon enough.’ ‘Why?’ he said. ‘Because he’s too old,’ I said. ‘You can’t talk about those things without getting old yourself, no matter how young you are to begin with.’ ‘It doesn’t seem to have affected you,’ he said. ‘I’ve lived longer than he has.’ ‘Ah,’ he said. ‘But this is your first trip back, isn’t it? You’re not like the others. They’ve been coming back for years.’ ‘I know that,’ I said. ‘That’s why I want to talk to you. I want to know all about it. What I see around me is terrible, but the others’ knowledge seems to be even worse.’ ‘What are you talking about?’ he said. ‘The people who live here now. The way they dress, their manners, their ideas, their whole way of life.’ ‘Well,’ he said, ‘it’s the twentieth century, isn’t it?’ ‘Is it?’ I said. ‘Yes,’ he said, ‘the year 1950, to be exact.’ ‘Then what does all this stuff have to do with 1950?’ I said. ‘With 1950?’ he said. ‘That’s just the point,’ I said. ‘And the people. Why are they dressed like that? And why do they behave like animals?’ ‘They don’t,’ he said. ‘They’re not animals. They’re human beings.’ ‘But they look like animals,’ I said. ‘Look!’ I said. ‘At that man over there. Doesn’t he look like an ape? And the woman next to him. She’s got more hair on her face than he has. And the one over there is practically naked. He doesn’t have any clothes on at all. And they talk like animals. Listen to them! They yell and scream and swear at each other like that all the time. I’ve never heard anything like it. I thought this was a civilized country.’ ‘It is,’ he said. ‘It’s more civilized than you think.’ ‘How can you say that?’ I said. ‘When you can walk along the street and see men and women making love right out in the open. There’s one doing it right over there.’ ‘So what?’ he said. ‘And every house looks like a brothel. 111 111 "Neither can this be supposed. And so, Glaucon, I said, we have at last arrived at the hymn of dialectic.This is that strain which is of the intellect only, but which thefaculty of sight will nevertheless be found to imitate; for sight,as you may remember, was imagined by us after a while to behold thereal animals and stars, and last of all the sun himself. And so withdialectic; when a person starts on the discovery of the absolute bythe light of reason only, and without any assistance of sense, andperseveres until by pure intelligence he arrives at the perceptionof the absolute good, he at last finds himself at the end of the intellectualworld, as in the case of sight at the end of the visible. Exactly, he said. Then this is the progress which you call dialectic? True. But the release of the prisoners from chains, and their translationfrom the shadows to the images and to the light, and the ascent fromthe underground den to the sun, while in his presence they are vainlytrying to look on animals and plants and the light of the sun, butare able to perceive even with their weak eyes the images in the water(which are divine), and are the shadows of true existence (not shadowsof images cast by a light of fire, which compared with the sun isonly an image) --this power of elevating the highest principle inthe soul to the contemplation of that which is best in existence,with which we may compare the raising of that faculty which is thevery light of the body to the sight of that which is brightest inthe material and visible world --this power is given, as I was saying,by all that study and pursuit of the arts which has been described. I agree in what you are saying, he replied, which may be hard to believe,yet, from another point of view, is harder still to deny. This, however,is not a theme to be treated of in passing only, but will have tobe discussed again and again. And so, whether our conclusion be trueor false, let us assume all this, and proceed at once from the preludeor preamble to the chief strain, and describe that in like manner.Say, then, what is the nature and what are the divisions of dialectic,and what are the paths which lead thither; for these paths will alsolead to our final rest? @@ -2785,15 +2785,15 @@ And assuredly no one will argue that there is any other method ofcomprehending b Impossible, he said. Then dialectic, and dialectic alone, goes directly to the first principleand is the only science which does away with hypotheses in order tomake her ground secure; the eye of the soul, which is literally buriedin an outlandish slough, is by her gentle aid lifted upwards; andshe uses as handmaids and helpers in the work of conversion, the scienceswhich we have been discussing. Custom terms them sciences, but theyought to have some other name, implying greater clearness than opinionand less clearness than science: and this, in our previous sketch,was called understanding. But why should we dispute about names whenwe have realities of such importance to consider? Why indeed, he said, when any name will do which expresses the thoughtof the mind with clearness?" "Summary: The narrator discusses the power of dialectic and its ability to reveal the absolute truth. Narrative arc: Exposition -Enunciation: First-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Glaucon, the narrator -Time setting: Contemporary" "Klarer sind die Dinge auch mir nicht, aber ich mu doch hoffen, da er uns zu einem sichern Ergebnis fhrt. Sehr weit knnen wir nicht von der Schwche des Fleisches sprechen, das durch den Dialektizismus so sehr in seinem Spiele gefrdert wird, und doch ist es schwer, ihn aufzugeben oder sich ihm zu entwinden. Wie leicht er dem Menschen in die Hnde fllt! Er schafft ihm einen neuen Kitzel, denn man kann sein Spiel nur dann ernsthaft treiben, wenn man sich an der Oberflche des Daseins struben mssen. Die Philosophie war eine wohldenkende Schutzvorrichtung gegen den Dialektizismus, und ich bin kein Freund dieses Spiels. Aber wer versteht sich heute noch darauf, diese Tugend zu leben? Wenn man in die Welt hinausgehen will, so ist der Dialektizismus ein notwendiges Begleitspielzeug, das man mitnehmen mu wie ein Taschentuch. Man kommt damit weit und erleichtert sich das Leben. Ich kenne Leute, die ihn mit Vorliebe spielen und dabei ganz ruhig bleiben, weil sie sich sagen: Das ist nur ein Spiel, und hat nichts mit der Wahrheit zu tun. Und wenn sie nun einmal im Spiel glauben, da sie am Ende doch das absolute Wahrhafte erreicht haben, so leidet das ihnen gar nicht wehe. Sie stehen darauf nicht. Es gibt aber auch solche, die sich unglcklich fhlten, sobald sie ihren Dialektizismus ablegten. Da waren diese jungen Burschen zum Beispiel, denen du schon begegnet bist; sie machten sich auf, um den Falschen zu suchen, und fanden nicht den Falschen, sondern den Echten; und je mehr sie nach dem Falschen suchten, desto gewisser wurden sie von dem Echten. Und nun? Nun standen sie vor einer Wand, hinter der sich nichts verbarg. Du hast wohl gemerkt, Glaucon, da alle meine Geschichten im Grunde eine einzige sind. Wenn sie sich voneinander unterscheiden, so nur dadurch, da jede die Geschichte von einem andern aus Sicht darstellt. Alle haben sie das gleiche Ende, und zwar eben das, was dich jetzt in Verlegenheit setzt. Denn das Ende zeigt sich immer gleich, unabhngig davon, ob man den Anfang mit Mhne oder Leichtigkeit gelangt hat. Der Dialektizismus bringt dich also nicht weiter, und deine ganze Arbeit wrde vergebens sein, wenn du nicht bereit wrst, von der Dialektik zur Mystik berzugehen. Das ist es nun, worauf es ankommt, und du kannst dir's doch wohl gedacht haben, sonst wre dir dein Kamerad nicht zugeflogen. So weit hast du ja schon gedacht, wenn du nicht befriedigt wirst, bevor du die ganze Geschichte kennengelernt hast. Ich sage: Es geht weiter als Dialektik. Das Nichts ist nicht das Ende, sondern die Vorbereitung zum Ewigen. Das Endlose wird erst dann wahrhaft Endloses, wenn es sich selbst enthlt. Ich habe mich schon oft gewundert ber die Unbedingtheit, mit welcher du das Wort """"ewig"""" gebrauchst. Aber hier ist es sehr richtig. In der Dialektik mu der Mensch seine Grenzen berwinden, und das kann er nur, wenn er sich endlos macht. " +Time setting: 1950s" "The power of the dialectic is immense. It can take any given argument and expose it to such a merciless cross-examination that all the defects in its logic, its lack of consistency, its failures to observe its own premises, are brought out in such glaring relief that it can no longer hold water. And then when the refutation is complete, it does not matter what the argument was about; if it is the truth, it will come back at you like a boomerang. Only this time it will be much more subtle than before, because now you know how to handle it and you have had practice in spotting its tricks."""" There was silence for a moment or two. Then Glaucon spoke again. """"It sounds terrible! But why do you say it with such relish?"""" Because,"" said the narrator, ""I love to see the truth standing up and talking back to someone who thinks he has got it all sewn up. I don't mind telling you that there is nothing I enjoy better than to watch a good cross-examination at work. The thing is so vivid, so vital, so alive...."""" He was silent for a moment, then he went on: """"If you want an idea of how it works, just think of those films of Hitchcock's where some poor devil of a fellow is being interrogated by the police. The man is sitting at the desk with his head bowed and his hands clenched in front of him, while the police inspector sits opposite, leaning forward with his chin resting on one hand and staring at him with those hypnotic eyes of his. And the questions keep coming, one after another, sharp, precise, cutting into the man's defences, probing deeper and deeper until suddenly the whole edifice comes crashing down upon him and he is found out."""" The voice became harsher as he spoke. There was something intensely vivid, almost physical, in the way he described it. Glaucon looked at him curiously. It was hard to imagine the quiet, reserved young man who had sat opposite him only a few days ago, capable of such intense feeling. Then he realized that the conversation was getting away from its proper channel. He tried to bring it back to the point. """"I suppose,"""" he said, """"that in order to understand Plato, one would have to be pretty well acquainted with the actual practice of the art of dialectic."""" That is true,"" replied the narrator. ""But then, unless you have already studied philosophy, you cannot possibly understand Plato without having some knowledge of dialectic. For Plato assumes throughout his dialogues that his readers will recognize and appreciate the nature of the dialectical process."""" Glaucon nodded. """"Yes,"""" he said, """"I had forgotten about that."""" Well,"" continued the narrator, ""the fact that Plato assumes certain knowledge on the part of his readers makes it very difficult for beginners to follow what he is saying. " 112 112 "At any rate, we are satisfied, as before, to have four divisions;two for intellect and two for opinion, and to call the first divisionscience, the second understanding, the third belief, and the fourthperception of shadows, opinion being concerned with becoming, andintellect with being; and so to make a proportion: -- As being is to becoming, so is pure intellect to opinion. And as intellect is to opinion, so is science to belief, and understandingto the perception of shadows. But let us defer the further correlationand subdivision of the subjects of opinion and of intellect, for itwill be a long enquiry, many times longer than this has been. @@ -2809,13 +2809,13 @@ Certainly, he said. The same natures must still be chosen, and the preference ag And what are these? Such gifts as keenness and ready powers of acquisition; for the mindmore often faints from the severity of study than from the severityof gymnastics: the toil is more entirely the mind's own, and is notshared with the body. Very true, he replied. Further, he of whom we are in search should have a good memory, andbe an unwearied solid man who is a lover of labour in any line; orhe will never be able to endure the great amount of bodily exerciseand to go through all the intellectual discipline and study whichwe require of him. Certainly, he said; he must have natural gifts. The mistake at present is, that those who study philosophy have novocation, and this, as I was before saying, is the reason why shehas fallen into disrepute: her true sons should take her by the handand not bastards." "Summary: The text discusses the divisions of intellect and opinion, and the importance of education in a political state. -Enunciation: Third-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Enlightenment" Doubtless he was an excellent man, but we are not all endowed with the same kind of intellect or the same degree of education. There are many people in this world who do not understand the fine shades of meaning which attach to a word like ‘objective,’ for instance; and as for ‘subjective’—well, I have heard it defined by persons who ought to have known better as ‘something that goes on inside you.’ “Then there is the question of opinion. A man may be quite justified in his opinions, and yet if they conflict with those of another person, it’s generally best to keep them to himself. There’s nothing worse for the digestion than strong meat when it comes too soon. For my part, I prefer to swallow mine whole, as it were, when I know that I shall have time to digest them properly.” “I take your point,” said Mr. Dalgliesh, “and I promise you that, whatever your own views may be, I will not attempt to prejudice my own client’s case. But may I ask you what you mean by saying that you will have time to digest your opinions properly?” “It’s very simple,” replied Mr. Marvel. “I am going to be married on the 17th of October. This case will come up before then, and after that I’m going to retire from business and lead the life of a country gentleman. So there will be plenty of time for me to study up the subject. I needn’t bother about it now.” Mr. Dalgliesh nodded and helped himself to some more whisky-and-soda. “That reminds me,” he said. “May I ask how you came to hear of this affair? Who told you of it?” Mr. Marvel hesitated for a moment. “To tell you the truth,” he confessed, “it was the Inspector who gave me the tip-off. He said he had given you the name of one of my firm, and that you would probably call round here later on in the day. As it happened, I was pretty certain that you would, so I left instructions to let me know the moment you arrived. It wasn’t much trouble to me to drop everything and come along at once. I hope you don’t mind my doing so?” “Not at all. It was very good of you. And you’re sure that it won’t interfere with your other work?” “Oh, no. There’s no hurry about that sort of thing. The only reason I didn’t go down to Market Basing myself was because I’d got rather an important engagement on hand just now.” “What sort of an engagement?” asked Mr. Dalgliesh, who had suddenly become very keenly interested in the conversation. “Well,” replied Mr. Marvel, “I think perhaps I’d better not say any more about that just yet. Perhaps some other time....” Mr. Dalgliesh sipped his drink thoughtfully. “I see,” he murmured. “I understand. You live in interesting times, Mr. Marvel, and it behoves you to be careful.” +Literary movement: Hardboiled" But it isn’t the one we’re looking for. The intellect that is worth anything in its own line is bound to be eccentric in some direction. We can’t afford to lose any of these fine divisions and subdivisions of intellect, just as we can’t afford to lose any of our fingers. They may be awkward things to have on your hands when you don’t want them; but they come in useful once in a way. “The political state needs all the brains it can get hold of—needs them in every shape and size and colour. And there’s another thing that’s important: It doesn’t matter a damn what a man thinks, so long as he knows his own mind and acts up to it. “The best statesmen are always the men who know their own minds the most completely and the most clearly. But no two people think alike. The differences of opinion that are going to crop up in a political assembly are as various as the variations of the human voice. There’s nothing like having a lot of different kinds of voices, singing the same tune. You’ll get more harmony that way.” I nodded assent to this theory of yours. It struck me as being very sound. But I was afraid to say anything lest I should give him the idea that I had been following his remarks with close attention. So I merely grunted. He saw my hesitation, and smiled at me in his dry, grim fashion. “Don’t worry about it,” he said. “I don’t expect you to agree with me. Only I’ve got a right to talk here if I like. This is my house, remember. If I want to occupy your mind with something else than your stomach, I’ve a perfect right to do it.” “Yes,” I answered, “that’s very true. But I’m afraid I shall have to go now. I’ve got an appointment at twelve o’clock.” “Oh!” he said sharply. “With whom?” “With Mr. Spence.” “Ah!” His eyes twinkled behind their spectacles. “And what are you going to do with Mr. Spence?” “I am going to drive him out to see the place where my dog was found.” “Humph!” said Sir Charles. “Quite so! Quite so! Anything new turn up?” “Nothing whatever.” He looked at his watch. “It’s nearly twelve now,” he said. “I wonder whether you could manage to stay here for half an hour. I want to ask you a few questions about that business.” “Certainly!” I replied eagerly. “Anything you like. I’d give anything to help you in this case. It’s getting on my nerves, sir.” “I thought it might,” he said softly. “You seem to take it rather to heart.” “I can’t help it,” I answered. “It’s the only case I’ve ever had to do with, and it’s given me a taste for detective work.” “A taste for detective work?” 113 113 "What do you mean? In the first place, her votary should not have a lame or halting industry--I mean, that he should not be half industrious and half idle: as,for example, when a man is a lover of gymnastic and hunting, and allother bodily exercises, but a hater rather than a lover of the labourof learning or listening or enquiring. Or the occupation to whichhe devotes himself may be of an opposite kind, and he may have theother sort of lameness. Certainly, he said. And as to truth, I said, is not a soul equally to be deemed halt andlame which hates voluntary falsehood and is extremely indignant atherself and others when they tell lies, but is patient of involuntaryfalsehood, and does not mind wallowing like a swinish beast in themire of ignorance, and has no shame at being detected? To be sure. And, again, in respect of temperance, courage, magnificence, and everyother virtue, should we not carefully distinguish between the trueson and the bastard? for where there is no discernment of such qualitiesStates and individuals unconsciously err and the State makes a ruler,and the individual a friend, of one who, being defective in some partof virtue, is in a figure lame or a bastard. @@ -2834,14 +2834,14 @@ Yes, he said, that is the only kind of knowledge which takes lastingroot. Yes, I said; and the capacity for such knowledge is the great criterionof dialectical talent: the comprehensive mind is always the dialectical." "Summary: The text discusses the importance of having a well-rounded education and the characteristics of a true philosopher. Trope: The ideal philosopher Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy -Active character: Two characters engaging in a conversation" "And the end of it all is that a man may be a good detective without knowing what his mother is, but he cannot be a philosopher unless he has learned everything. That's why I want you to know your mythology and your Latin and your Greek, as well as your cookery book and your police reports. Do you see?"""" Yes,"" said Lestrade, who had become quite used to Mr Holmes' whims and fancies. ""I think I see. But this fellow was singularly clever."""" Singularly very,"" said Holmes. ""Ah, my dear Watson, perhaps you did not realize it, but you are dealing with a phenomenal man. The step from the Pomeranian terrier to Morpheus Jackson is a long one. Why, my career might have been duplicated in every respect if I had not had the spirit e.g., to break out in such a very singular way. With all eyes upon you at such a moment you could hardly fail to make an impression."""" It was a new light by which we viewed his client's actions, and yet it was a relief to both of us to find that life had been acted in some sort upon the same lines as our games. There was the charm of the contrary in it, and Sloman's conduct struck us both as fascinating and delightful. He had turned the screw of the tension until we had given a cry of pain. Holmes broke into a laugh. """"A queer passenger to pack your box with, Watson,"""" said he. """"The mouse-brown, whiskered, bald-headed little fellow who sits hooking his everlasting gloves on his right thumb and thinking of the age of Henry the Eighth. It's a blessing he takes his whistle to the other hand in the evenings. You'll remember that it was inquired of him at the Royal Society, by an old crony of yours, what is the most precise time which has ever been measured with any certainty. Tait's pendulum is usually given, but Lord Rossmore, whose accuracy is somewhat above the average, makes a small claim against it. He says it is 'about five one-thousandth parts less than the second of a mean solar day.'"""" For Heaven's sake, Holmes!"" cried Watson. ""Let us get back to the matter in hand, whatever that may be."""" Oh, yes! I was about to say that there is no foundation for the story upon which the police act. On three points they made a mistake: first, in their ideas concerning Jack the Ripper, second, in underestimating my intelligence, and third, in the attempt to frighten me after I had left their rooms. As to Jack the Ripper, in spite of the strong appearance to the contrary, I am fully convinced that this was not his work."""" Not his work! " +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: Two characters engaging in a conversation" "And if he doesn't know everything about everything, that shows he hasn't got a decent education."""" So what do you want? A man who knows something about everything and everything about something?"""" Well, it's the best I can do for you. And remember this: no matter how much he knows, he must always be polite to you and try to find out what you want from him."""" Oh, hell!... You're going to have me looking for a philosopher who is an encyclopedia, a servant and a gentleman as well. It won't be easy to find such a combination."""" But why are you so determined to see him tonight?"" Because, my dear young lady, there is only one person in the world who has been able to satisfy all my requirements, and he happens to be here tonight."""" What makes you think that he will satisfy all my requirements?"" You've got a long way to go yet before you can pass for a detective."""" He may not like me,"" she persisted. If he doesn't like you, you can always kill him,"""" said the doctor with a harsh laugh. The girl was silent for a moment, as though taken aback by his sudden bitterness. Then she looked up at him and asked: Tell me, Doctor, how long have you known Mr. Blank?"" Since 1919."" Have you never seen him since then?"""" No."" Why not?"" Because he didn't want to see me."" Then why did you come to Russia?"" Because he wanted me to. There are some things you don't ask questions about."""" The girl nodded her head thoughtfully. Why didn't you tell me all this before?"" I only just found out myself. I'll tell you the whole story when I have time. Meanwhile, you'd better come along with me and meet your philosopher."""" They walked on in silence for a while. Then the girl remarked: """"You know, Doctor, I think you must be as great a fool as I am."""" What do you mean by that?"" I mean that you should never have come to Russia if you knew you were going to hate everything Russian so much."""" I haven't said I hated everything Russian."""" You have implied it several times already."" That's because I'm very tired."" Yes, I noticed that yourself earlier on. But now you seem to have recovered a little. Sit down here, please; we'll wait for our friend here."""" They sat down on a stone bench and began to smoke. After a short pause the doctor continued: Do you believe in God?"" Why do you ask me that?"" Just answer yes or no."" No."" Can you prove it?"" Of course not."" Then why do you say no?"" Because I've never felt Him in my life. When I see people praying and getting excited over religious processions, it makes me feel sick. When I hear them saying that they love their neighbour and yet go around cheating and robbing him, I lose faith in God altogether. " 114 114 "I agree with you, he said. These, I said, are the points which you must consider; and those whohave most of this comprehension, and who are more steadfast in theirlearning, and in their military and other appointed duties, when theyhave arrived at the age of thirty have to be chosen by you out ofthe select class, and elevated to higher honour; and you will haveto prove them by the help of dialectic, in order to learn which ofthem is able to give up the use of sight and the other senses, andin company with truth to attain absolute being: And here, my friend,great caution is required. Why great caution? Do you not remark, I said, how great is the evil which dialectic hasintroduced? What evil? he said. The students of the art are filled with lawlessness. Quite true, he said. Do you think that there is anything so very unnatural or inexcusablein their case? or will you make allowance for them? @@ -2856,14 +2856,14 @@ Impossible. And when he ceases to think them honourable and natural as heretofor He cannot. And from being a keeper of the law he is converted into a breakerof it? Unquestionably. Now all this is very natural in students of philosophy such as I havedescribed, and also, as I was just now saying, most excusable. Yes, he said; and, I may add, pitiable. Therefore, that your feelings may not be moved to pity about our citizenswho are now thirty years of age, every care must be taken in introducingthem to dialectic." "Summary: The speaker discusses the importance of education and the potential consequences of studying philosophy. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic dialogue -Active character: The speaker and his interlocutor" "And yet if a man's been born with brains and they've been let go to waste, what good is he?"""" All right,"" said the other. ""Suppose you hadn't been an usher in a dame school."""" I shouldn't have been that either, sir. That was only because I was clever at learning things out of books. But I could have been anything else just as well. Suppose I'd been a professor of philosophy at Oxford or Cambridge."""" Well, then?"" Why, then I should have known all about Plato and Aristotle, and how everything comes out of prime matter, and God made it by way of emanations, and the soul's immortal, and all sorts of rubbish like that. And there wouldn't have been anything left for me to do but to go into the Church. It would have been my duty to preach that stuff every Sunday, and people would have come to church because they thought I knew something, and I should have got their money. That's all that knowing philosophy would have done for me."""" Well, suppose you hadn't known any philosophy?"""" Then I shouldn't have been a parson, that's all. You might have been a parson yourself, sir; but you aren't a fool."""" No, but I'm not a murderer either."" The speaker looked up sharply. """"I don't understand you, sir,"""" he said. For answer, Mr. Bunting pointed to the dead body on the floor. The other man bent down and examined it curiously. """"That's Medea's work,"""" he said at last. """"The whole thing's Greek mythology. The witch who poisoned the king and the queen so that they killed themselves."""" Yes,"" said Mr. Bunting. ""I know. But suppose you had studied philosophy and gone into the Church. Wouldn't you have preached about it?"""" I might have done,"" said the other slowly. ""But I shouldn't have killed them. That's not in the Bible, anyhow."""" They both stood silent for some time, gazing down at the dead man. Suddenly the other laughed. """"You're a queer chap, Bunting,"""" he said. """"I never met anyone quite like you before."""" Thank you, sir,"" said Mr. Bunting. ""I try to please everybody. You see, I don't really care much about killing people. It's quite easy to kill them, but there's no fun in it. If they're clever, it gives them a sort of respectability. They look as if they were enjoying it."""" Are you mad?"" said the other. Not exactly mad, sir. But I can tell you this: if you ever talk to me about philosophy again, I'll cut your throat."" He turned away and went into the front room. A moment later the two policemen entered. " +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: The speaker and his interlocutor" "Dites donc, monsieur l'inspecteur, vous qui savez tout de moi, que diable est-ce que je viens faire ici? Vous voulez bien me poser des questions... A votre age, c'est bientot fini d'apprendre... Et puis, qu'est-ce que ca peut vous foutre ce que je suis venu faire dans ce bar? Rien, mais j'aime a savoir. Si on vient souvent au bar, cela veut dire qu'on y est bien; et si on y est bien, on y rentre pour quelque chose. Ah! ben, je suis bien ici, c'est certain; je rentre pour beaucoup de choses... Mais la-bas, je ne rentre pour rien du tout! Pourquoi ne rentrez-vous pas? demandai-je brusquement. Il haletait, les yeux eclates. Parce que... parce que, voyez-vous, je suis un peu paresseux. Ah! ah!... C'est tout? Non, non, c'est encore autre chose... Je suis... je suis trop gros... Ce n'est pas facile de monter ces escaliers-la! Vraiment? dit Tardiveau en s'interessant soudain a son cigare. Oui... Les escaliers sont difficiles a monter. Est-ce que vous connaissez les marches? Ca, je crois bien! Alors, vous auriez de la peine a monter? Oh! oui, des difficultes... Des difficultes formidables! Puisque c'est ainsi, reprit-il avec une singuliere fermete, je vais vous donner quelques renseignements qui pourront peut-etre vous servir. Je sais par quelles portes vous passez et je sais surtout quelles sont vos occupations pendant les nuits ou vous etes chez Madame Blanche. Mauvais garcon! pensai-je. Il faut le retenir la-dessus, car il risquerait de se vanter de ses connaissances et d'en provoquer des ennuis. Je lui dis simplement: De quoi s'agit-il? Eh bien, reprit-il tranquillement, vous venez par la rue de l'Ecole-de-Medicine, vous entrez par la porte cochere de l'Institut, vous montez l'escalier a gauche jusqu'au second, puis vous traversez deux salles, celle du rez-de-chaussee ou l'on appelle ""l'academie"" et celle du premier ou l'on dit ""la chambre bleue"", enfin vous vous dirigez vers la droite et vous arrivez a un corridor assez long, ou vous rencontrez toujours les memes gens qui parlent toujours les memes choses, et, au bout de ce corridor, vous entrez dans une petite salle a moitie vide ou il y a un petit homme assis devant un piano qui joue de la musique moderne et dont personne ne saurait distinguer les accords, bien qu'il soit entoure de jeunes gens qui pretendent en connaitre tous les secrets et qui se font passer pour des artistes. En somme, je monte chez un pianiste, c'est ca? fit-il en riant. Oui, voila ce que c'est. Et puis? Et puis, quand vous arrivez a cette salle, poursuivit l'inspecteur, vous allez chercher le pianiste et vous l'emmenez avec vous dans un coin obscur ou vous chantez ensemble en boitant comme des faineants. Oh! ca, continua-t-il avec un air de bonhomme, je sais bien ca; mais, enfin, comment diable avez-vous pu apprendre toutes ces choses-la? " 115 115 "Certainly. There is a danger lest they should taste the dear delight too early;for youngsters, as you may have observed, when they first get thetaste in their mouths, argue for amusement, and are always contradictingand refuting others in imitation of those who refute them; like puppy-dogs,they rejoice in pulling and tearing at all who come near them. Yes, he said, there is nothing which they like better. And when they have made many conquests and received defeats at thehands of many, they violently and speedily get into a way of not believinganything which they believed before, and hence, not only they, butphilosophy and all that relates to it is apt to have a bad name withthe rest of the world. Too true, he said. But when a man begins to get older, he will no longer be guilty ofsuch insanity; he will imitate the dialectician who is seeking fortruth, and not the eristic, who is contradicting for the sake of amusement;and the greater moderation of his character will increase insteadof diminishing the honour of the pursuit. @@ -2876,17 +2876,17 @@ Yes, I said, Glaucon, and of our governesses too; for you must notsuppose that w There you are right, he said, since we have made them to share inall things like the men. Well, I said, and you would agree (would you not?) that what has beensaid about the State and the government is not a mere dream, and althoughdifficult not impossible, but only possible in the way which has beensupposed; that is to say, when the true philosopher kings are bornin a State, one or more of them, despising the honours of this presentworld which they deem mean and worthless, esteeming above all thingsright and the honour that springs from right, and regarding justiceas the greatest and most necessary of all things, whose ministersthey are, and whose principles will be exalted by them when they setin order their own city?" "Summary: The text discusses the importance of philosophy and its role in shaping the character and actions of individuals and societies. Narrative arc: Philosophical discourse -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic dialogues +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, Glaucon -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s Fuzzy place: The den -Diegetic time: A few minutes" 'Yes, I know,' said Socrates. 'I have a feeling that you are going to make an attack on philosophy next.' 'No, not at all,' said Glaucon. 'What I was really coming to say is this: I have been thinking it over and I can't see why the possession of knowledge should be regarded as morally better than the possession of cash or goods of any kind. For instance, suppose a man has discovered some new way of making money; if he keeps his discovery secret he becomes rich, but if he gives it away he remains poor. The man who has made the discovery is in exactly the same position as the man who has solved a mathematical problem and has the solution to himself. Knowledge and wealth are both useful things, and there seems no reason why either should be considered morally better than the other. What do you think of this?' 'You are absolutely right,' said Socrates. 'It is really quite a good idea. The possession of knowledge is just as useful as the possession of money, and so far as utility goes, neither is any better than the other. But there is another point of view which is even more important than that of utility, and that is the moral point of view. Now, to live a happy life we must have a good character, and a good character is based upon a good upbringing. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" And when your philosophy had helped you to become a good man, it had done its work and could go. It is not concerned with the actions of men who are already good. It is concerned with the character of the man who has still to become good. That is why it is so useless to Socrates in the den. He has no further need of it. And that is why he says of his own philosophy that ‘it is difficult but not painful.’” “I don’t understand,” said Glaucon, slowly. “It seems plain enough to me,” said Celia. “Philosophy is only valuable to men like Socrates and Plato and Aristotle because they can use it to make themselves better men. But what good is it to anyone else? I’ll tell you. If you want to know how little good it is, just try thinking about it for five minutes. You’ll see.” She turned back to her book again. “But you’re talking as if there were two kinds of people in the world,” said Glaucon. “Those who need philosophy and those who don’t. That’s absurd. Everyone needs philosophy. We all need it. And it’s no use saying that Socrates didn’t need it any more because he was already good. What about us? Are we supposed to be bad?” “Good God, no,” said Celia. “You’re the most disgusting people I’ve ever met in my life. Just look at yourselves. Look at this filthy hole you live in, and the way you dress, and your manners, and your conversation, and your ideas. You haven’t got a single decent habit between the two of you.” “Do you think so?” said Glaucon. “Yes,” said Celia. “I do.” “We have one habit,” said Glaucon. “What’s that?” “We don’t steal.” “That’s true,” said Celia. “You don’t steal money or anything worth stealing. But you steal time and energy and attention and affection and even food and drink from everyone around you. I never saw such a pair of vampires before in my life. And I’m going to tell you something else. You’re both dishonest.” “Are you sure?” said Glaucon. “Of course I’m sure,” said Celia. “You say you don’t gamble. That’s perfectly true. You don’t gamble with money. But you gamble with everything else. You gamble with your lives, and with other people’s lives, and with other people’s property, and with other people’s feelings. You gamble with your own happiness, and with your own security, and with your own dignity. You gamble with your own self-respect, and with your own sense of decency, and with your own intelligence. You even gamble with your own souls. And do you know what you gamble with to replace all these things? Nothing! 116 116 "How will they proceed? They will begin by sending out into the country all the inhabitantsof the city who are more than ten years old, and will take possessionof their children, who will be unaffected by the habits of their parents;these they will train in their own habits and laws, I mean in thelaws which we have given them: and in this way the State and constitutionof which we were speaking will soonest and most easily attain happiness,and the nation which has such a constitution will gain most. Yes, that will be the best way. And I think, Socrates, that you havevery well described how, if ever, such a constitution might come intobeing. Enough then of the perfect State, and of the man who bears its image--there is no difficulty in seeing how we shall describe him. @@ -2904,13 +2904,13 @@ Yes, if I can, I will, I said. I shall particularly wish to hear what were the f That question, I said, is easily answered: the four governments ofwhich I spoke, so far as they have distinct names, are, first, thoseof Crete and Sparta, which are generally applauded; what is termedoligarchy comes next; this is not equally approved, and is a formof government which teems with evils: thirdly, democracy, which naturallyfollows oligarchy, although very different: and lastly comes tyranny,great and famous, which differs from them all, and is the fourth andworst disorder of a State. I do not know, do you? of any other constitutionwhich can be said to have a distinct character. There are lordshipsand principalities which are bought and sold, and some other intermediateforms of government. But these are nondescripts and may be found equallyamong Hellenes and among barbarians. Yes, he replied, we certainly hear of many curious forms of governmentwhich exist among them." "Summary: The text discusses the ideal form of government and the training of citizens in a perfect State. Narrative arc: Exposition -Enunciation: Dialog between Socrates and Glaucon -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Dialogue -Active character: Socrates, Glaucon" And if so, it will be of far higher value to the individual than a knowledge of what things are just and honourable and good, which are only his own ideas of them? But is not this truly to know the truth about just and honourable things when a man distinguishes the ideas themselves in which they all participate, and lives according to them? Are you not aware that all these notions--like the notions of goodness, beauty, justice, holy, and the like--are commonly supposed to exist in a separate place in which abstract essence dwells, whether they exist or not? May not this separateness of them be most aptly expressed by saying that they exist in another world? And yet, as we were saying, he who would harvest most benefit from this world, ought to know how to attain the things of the next; and he, I think, who arranges the matters of this world as he ought, is sure to be completely successful in obtaining the things of the other world, if he be also fair and true in dealing with them. Has not this been shown already, and shall I say anything further? No, unless you like; but I thought that I must remind you because of the arguments which you have omitted, and which proved that the just man cannot possibly be hurt by either fraud or violence. These were the points which you might have made use of. But do you mean, as I gather, that there is a way in which the just man may be hurt by sorcery and force? +Active character: Socrates, Glaucon" 'Yes, my friend,' I said, 'but he will be too good for the State; we cannot have him.' 'What!' said Polemarchus, 'would that be no better than to have a noble horse which is too good for his work?' 'You imply in this illustration,' I replied, 'that the State ought to have the same sort of man that we ought to have. Are you not quite sure of that?' 'I am sure of it.' 'And when education has been given to the guardians and philosophers, when their natures have been nurtured in a manner suitable to their origin, would you send them down again into the hollow of the earth, there to dwell in the dark, unless you could help it? Certainly not, Polemarchus.' 'No; indeed, indeed,' he said. 'And if you are right, there can be no reason why any of your citizens should live farther underground than the place which he himself has assigned to himself.' 'A very good point, Glaucon,' I observed; 'the denial of which might have introduced a singular contradiction into our arguments. For if the truly best life had not been the life of a citizen, many things which have been surely demonstrated would want their results. Still I should like to know whether you proceed upon the same principle which I was assuming; there is nothing unknown to you, I should imagine, which could be an element of such a life?'' 'Nothing whatever,' he replied. 'And if that is what you mean I agree with you in thinking that such a one must certainly be a guardian who possesses the knowledge and ability which you require.' 'Then nothing else needs to be determined,' I said; 'for these are merely the men, when found, whom we shall appoint our guardians; and they will be the men, too, and not others, on whose education the whole argument has been urged. With them, then, and with their children, let us now proceed to the foundation of the State.' 'By all means.' 'The first generation, however, will not need much education: they will be trained in the ordinary manners which the people of Peloponnesus share with other Greeks, and then they will go forth as guards and soldiers until they become aged.' 'Certainly.' 'When they have remained some time in the field, and their bodies and souls have been tempered like young wild animals, then, and not till then, they will be trained to be gentle and to follow the noble pursuit of philosophy; in that way growing continually more gentle and attaining that state which you describe.' 'That is good,' I said. 'Now what shall we say to this further question? What will become of them when they get old and their eyes grow dim and their teeth fall out? Will they not have to go away and keep house, since they will not be able to see sufficiently for the warfare of the field or for any other work of a brave soldier? Or do you wish them to be always on the move like the Athenians and their colony of Selymbria, wandering about and seeking after other dwellings in long expeditions? 117 117 "Do you know, I said, that governments vary as the dispositions ofmen vary, and that there must be as many of the one as there are ofthe other? For we cannot suppose that States are made of 'oak androck,' and not out of the human natures which are in them, and whichin a figure turn the scale and draw other things after them? Yes, he said, the States are as the men are; they grow out of humancharacters. Then if the constitutions of States are five, the dispositions ofindividual minds will also be five? @@ -2920,15 +2920,15 @@ Certainly, he replied, we must do as you say. Shall we follow our old plan, whic That way of viewing and judging of the matter will be very suitable. First, then, I said, let us enquire how timocracy (the governmentof honour) arises out of aristocracy (the government of the best).Clearly, all political changes originate in divisions of the actualgoverning power; a government which is united, however small, cannotbe moved. Very true, he said. In what way, then, will our city be moved, and in what manner thetwo classes of auxiliaries and rulers disagree among themselves orwith one another? Shall we, after the manner of Homer, pray the Musesto tell us 'how discord first arose'? Shall we imagine them in solemnmockery, to play and jest with us as if we were children, and to addressus in a lofty tragic vein, making believe to be in earnest?" "Summary: The speaker discusses the different types of governments and dispositions of individuals. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The speaker, interlocutor -Time setting: Contemporary" 'Very good,' says he. 'Now you'll take your choice of three forms of government, and I'll tell you which one is the truest.' 'That's easy enough,' says I. 'I've got my eye on it from the beginning.' 'Don't be too sure,' says he. 'You know very well that there are three kinds of governments: there's the democratical, the oligarchical, and the aristocratical; and if you don't choose right you may find yourself in a pretty pickle.' 'I know that all right,' says I; 'and so, when you ask me which I prefer, I shall say aristocratical; because that's the best of the three.' 'You'll have to give me a better reason than that for your money,' says he. 'Why not?' 'Because it isn't true,' says he. 'What isn't true?' 'That aristocracy is the best of the three,' says he. 'If that isn't true, what is?' 'Listen,' says he. 'The first two are alike in this: they're both made up of men who aren't wise at all, and so neither of them is any good. But aristocracy has this advantage over them, that its rulers pretend to be wise when they're really fools, while the others pretend to be fools when they're just as foolish as you or I. So by the law of probabilities aristocracy is the least bad of the three. But if you want to know the real best, you must look for it somewhere else.' 'Where?' 'In the city of the gods, of course,' says he. 'What city is that?' 'It's the city where the gods live,' says he. 'And how do you mean? Aren't they everywhere?' 'They are,' says he, 'but they don't live together.' 'Do you mean to say they don't live together?' 'Certainly they do not,' says he. 'Well then, how can you call it a city?' 'Because it's a place with walls round it,' says he. 'But what about the other cities? Don't they have walls round them too?' 'Of course they do,' says he. 'Then why isn't each of them a city of the gods?' 'Because they're only the houses of private individuals, and they're called palaces instead,' says he. 'Is it like that in Sparta?' 'Yes,' says he, 'the royal palace is like that there; but the city of the gods is much finer and grander than it.' 'Tell us about it,' says I. 'All right,' says he, 'there are ten thousand people living there, and they're all philosophers and lovers of wisdom.' 'Where did they come from?' 'From every part of the world,' says he. 'How did they happen to meet together in one place?' 'In this way,' says he: 'when a man is born into the world he's put to school immediately, and stays there till he's thirty years old.' +Time setting: 1950s" "You have to be pretty smart to make a living at that sort of thing. It takes brains and education."""" Well, I'm not so dumb,"" I said, ""and I've never had any education."" He looked at me for a long time. """"Look here,"""" he said finally, """"I know all about you and your kind. You people are the ones who give us a bad name. You're the ones who get drunk and start shooting in the streets. You're the ones who fight with your wives and then go out and screw some other woman because you can't control your animal appetites. You don't deserve any respect."""" Well, maybe I don't,"" I said, ""but how do you explain all those nice guys like Blondie and Pete?"""" I didn't give him a chance to answer. I was getting excited now. """"And what about all those kids we see around town every night? Don't they have their mothers and fathers?"""" And his wife?"" What's that got to do with it?"" Because the kid might be his own son, right?"" Why should I want my own son?"" he demanded, and I knew by the way he said it that he did want his son. But what about all those women?"" All those whores?"" Yeah. And what about the women who work in offices? The ones who live on the street where we lived?"""" They have husbands."" Sure, but what about the ones who haven't? What about the ones who are waiting for somebody who'll take them away from there?"""" He laughed harshly. """"The same as you wait for a job, maybe?"""" There was no sense arguing with him. I could see he wasn't going to give me anything for free; it would have to come out of my hide. Maybe it was just as well. At least it would give me something definite to think about instead of speculating all the time. Still, I had the feeling that if I could find out why the old man had been so interested in that kid, maybe it would help me understand why the girl was so interested in me. There was always a reason for everything. I felt better after I'd thought that. He hadn't told me yet how much I owed him for the information, but I figured it would be more than I wanted to pay. If it weren't for this deal with Blondie, I wouldn't have paid him anything. I walked up the street thinking about the deal. I still didn't know whether I wanted to go through with it or not, but I had to admit that it was the biggest deal I had ever run into. Right then I couldn't imagine anybody turning it down, but I knew that when you were talking about millions of dollars things looked different. You never knew what would happen when you started dealing with that kind of money. " 118 118 "How would they address us? After this manner: --A city which is thus constituted can hardly beshaken; but, seeing that everything which has a beginning has alsoan end, even a constitution such as yours will not last for ever,but will in time be dissolved. And this is the dissolution: --In plantsthat grow in the earth, as well as in animals that move on the earth'ssurface, fertility and sterility of soul and body occur when the circumferencesof the circles of each are completed, which in short-lived existencespass over a short space, and in long-lived ones over a long space.But to the knowledge of human fecundity and sterility all the wisdomand education of your rulers will not attain; the laws which regulatethem will not be discovered by an intelligence which is alloyed withsense, but will escape them, and they will bring children into theworld when they ought not. Now that which is of divine birth has aperiod which is contained in a perfect number, but the period of humanbirth is comprehended in a number in which first increments by involutionand evolution (or squared and cubed) obtaining three intervals andfour terms of like and unlike, waxing and waning numbers, make allthe terms commensurable and agreeable to one another. The base ofthese (3) with a third added (4) when combined with five (20) andraised to the third power furnishes two harmonies; the first a squarewhich is a hundred times as great (400 = 4 X 100), and the other afigure having one side equal to the former, but oblong, consistingof a hundred numbers squared upon rational diameters of a square (i.e. omitting fractions), the side of which is five (7 X 7 = 49 X 100= 4900), each of them being less by one (than the perfect square whichincludes the fractions, sc. 50) or less by two perfect squares ofirrational diameters (of a square the side of which is five = 50 +50 = 100); and a hundred cubes of three (27 X 100 = 2700 + 4900 +400 = 8000). Now this number represents a geometrical figure whichhas control over the good and evil of births. For when your guardiansare ignorant of the law of births, and unite bride and bridegroomout of season, the children will not be goodly or fortunate. And thoughonly the best of them will be appointed by their predecessors, stillthey will be unworthy to hold their fathers' places, and when theycome into power as guardians, they will soon be found to fall in takingcare of us, the Muses, first by under-valuing music; which neglectwill soon extend to gymnastic; and hence the young men of your Statewill be less cultivated. In the succeeding generation rulers willbe appointed who have lost the guardian power of testing the metalof your different races, which, like Hesiod's, are of gold and silverand brass and iron. And so iron will be mingled with silver, and brasswith gold, and hence there will arise dissimilarity and inequalityand irregularity, which always and in all places are causes of hatredand war. This the Muses affirm to be the stock from which discordhas sprung, wherever arising; and this is their answer to us. Yes, and we may assume that they answer truly. Why, yes, I said, of course they answer truly; how can the Muses speakfalsely? And what do the Muses say next? When discord arose, then the two races were drawn different ways:the iron and brass fell to acquiring money and land and houses andgold and silver; but the gold and silver races, not wanting moneybut having the true riches in their own nature, inclined towards virtueand the ancient order of things. There was a battle between them,and at last they agreed to distribute their land and houses amongindividual owners; and they enslaved their friends and maintainers,whom they had formerly protected in the condition of freemen, andmade of them subjects and servants; and they themselves were engagedin war and in keeping a watch against them. @@ -2940,18 +2940,18 @@ True. But in the fear of admitting philosophers to power, because they areno lon Yes. Yes, I said; and men of this stamp will be covetous of money, likethose who live in oligarchies; they will have, a fierce secret longingafter gold and silver, which they will hoard in dark places, havingmagazines and treasuries of their own for the deposit and concealmentof them; also castles which are just nests for their eggs, and inwhich they will spend large sums on their wives, or on any otherswhom they please. That is most true, he said. And they are miserly because they have no means of openly acquiringthe money which they prize; they will spend that which is anotherman's on the gratification of their desires, stealing their pleasuresand running away like children from the law, their father: they havebeen schooled not by gentle influences but by force, for they haveneglected her who is the true Muse, the companion of reason and philosophy,and have honoured gymnastic more than music." "Summary: The text discusses the dissolution and decline of a city, focusing on the effects of ignorance and lack of wisdom in governing. Narrative arc: Exposition -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The Muses, Hesiod Quoted work: ""Theogony"" by Hesiod -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s Fuzzy place: The city -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "But when they had dissolved the city into its original elements and brought it to the state in which it was before the Muses sang, then each man returned to his own place and there were none of them left in the city. 10. And Phaon said: """"What are we to make of this?"""" And I answered: """"I will tell you if you wish. For every city is like a sort of living being having a body composed of many bodies, as Plato says; but when any one of the parts suffers pain or disease and is carried off by death, the rest of the city is not affected, nor does it care at all; and after a time it forgets that such a man ever existed in the city. In the same way these men have seen how ignorance and lack of wisdom, like a plague, has entered the city and destroyed the good men who lived here; but they will forget about it and will no longer take care that their cities be well governed. But you, Hesiod, must leave this city and go away; for there is no hope for you here."""" Then he said: """"How am I to go?"""" And I answered: """"You can see what the streets are like in Athens today; follow any of them until you come to the harbor."""" " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" But this was a city that had not known the Muses, and in this city the Muses were dead. It was a city whose finest hour was long past and it had not known the wisdom to pass with grace into history. The Muses would have helped it to do so. But the Muses were dead and they had been dead for a long time. In their place there were no gods to guide the city or its people. There was only an empty sky, a harsh sun, and the biting wind from the sea. The Muses had always been against ignorance. They knew how strong ignorance could be and how terrible the price of knowledge was when it came too late. And now Hesiod sat in his darkened office and waited for the police to arrive. * * * * * When I first saw him I thought he was dead. He was sitting at his desk in the dark, a glass before him half filled with whiskey, and beside the glass a small bottle of medicine. His head rested on his arms and his shoulders shook with his sobs. Then I spoke to him and he lifted his face and I saw the tears on his cheeks and the tracks of the tears on his dirty white shirt. He tried to speak but he couldn't. He began to cry again and then he laughed. 'I've just been reading the papers,' he said. 'They're full of crime. Do you know what crime is?' 'Yes.' 'Then you must be a very unusual man. But then you always were an unusual man. You're the only one who ever cared about the Muses.' 'I don't see any Muses here,' I said. 'The Muses are gone,' he said. 'Gone because we killed them. We've destroyed everything that was decent and worthwhile in life. We've turned the world into a sewer and there's nowhere left to hide.' 'What's happened?' I asked. 'What's happened? Everything has happened. A hundred things have happened. A thousand things. I'll tell you what's happened. Ignorance has happened. Stupidity has happened. Greed and avarice and hate have happened. Meanness and cruelty and treachery and lies have happened. They've all happened and they're still happening right here in the city where I was born and brought up. They're happening every day and every night and every hour. And they're going to happen until the whole city is torn apart by violence and bloodshed. That's what's going to happen and there isn't anything I can do about it.' 'Why not?' I said. 'Why not?' he repeated. 'Because I'm old. Because I'm tired. Because I'm sick. Because I don't know enough. Because I'm ignorant and stupid. Because I'm not wise enough to stop it.' 'You might try,' I suggested. He looked at me and his eyes were like two black holes in his white face. 'And what good would it do?' he said. 'Do you think I haven't tried? 119 119 "Undoubtedly, he said, the form of government which you describe isa mixture of good and evil. Why, there is a mixture, I said; but one thing, and one thing only,is predominantly seen, --the spirit of contention and ambition; andthese are due to the prevalence of the passionate or spirited element. Assuredly, he said. Such is the origin and such the character of this State, which hasbeen described in outline only; the more perfect execution was notrequired, for a sketch is enough to show the type of the most perfectlyjust and most perfectly unjust; and to go through all the States andall the characters of men, omitting none of them, would be an interminablelabour. @@ -2968,17 +2968,17 @@ Exactly. His origin is as follows: --He is often the young son of a grave father And how does the son come into being? The character of the son begins to develop when he hears his mothercomplaining that her husband has no place in the government, of whichthe consequence is that she has no precedence among other women. Further,when she sees her husband not very eager about money, and insteadof battling and railing in the law courts or assembly, taking whateverhappens to him quietly; and when she observes that his thoughts alwayscentre in himself, while he treats her with very considerable indifference,she is annoyed, and says to her son that his father is only half aman and far too easy-going: adding all the other complaints abouther own ill-treatment which women are so fond of rehearsing. Yes, said Adeimantus, they give us plenty of them, and their complaintsare so like themselves." "Summary: The text discusses the character traits and origins of a specific form of government. Narrative arc: Exposition -Enunciation: Dialog between Socrates and Adeimantus -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue Active character: Socrates, Adeimantus Quoted character: Glaucon -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" But, indeed, I think that you have now got the character of this form of government very clearly before you; and it is not a little good to have had the conversation which we have just had with Glaucon. Now, then, let us turn round and see in what way our city will be affected by the introduction of tyrannical man. First of all, if there are many tyrannies in the state, or rather if there is a single one, they will ruin the poor. The reason is that tyranny naturally arises out of democracy, under whose influence the people receive the notion that they are equally as good as their rich neighbours; and they begin to live in an atmosphere of freedom, and by degrees fancy that they are really free, and, in consequence, in many ways insult the wealthy men, and treat them as equals. In that way the tyranny of one or more may be easily established. And when these men have acquired power and have made themselves safe, they first communicate with each other in the manner which I have described, and next they begin to get rid of any who may be opposed to their authority; and when they have thus killed off the most prominent, they proceed to banish those whom they select from the city, and take possession of their property. And in this way they soon become the rulers of those whom they had at first equalled and subdued, and the whole world is full of their pride and violence; they devote themselves wholly to pleasure, now that they are safe from opposition, and need not appear to be on their guard against others. This is what happens when liberty results in tyranny. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "But if you go on, I shall have to begin with the more ancient ones and then come back to you. There's a certain form of government which has been invented by one man alone but not by him as an individual; it was formed in his mind as a result of his upbringing and his own peculiar temperament; this form of government is aggressive, harsh and violent, and it has the following characteristics: it is quick-tempered, loves fighting and warfare, and always ready for war; it is jealous, overbearing, never able to stay put at home, and its eyes are fixed on other people's property; it thinks that the greatest disgrace is to be taken unawares and that the highest honour is to take the enemy by surprise; it is the most insolent of all governments and the most short-sighted, being concerned only with immediate advantage; it is full of pride, knows no moderation in expenditure, and is utterly incapable of learning by experience; it is the first to set about ruining cities, and is itself the ruin of everything. Who do you think this government is?"""" Socrates"" said Adeimantus. ""Yes,"" said Glaucon, ""and it's got a name, too. It's called democracy."" And so it is,"" replied Socrates. ""Tell me, did we not say just now that this form of government had two parts to it, both of them vicious?"" Yes, we did."" Well then, what are they?"" One part is made up of those who are by nature slaves and yet are free men, while the other part consists of those who are naturally free but have become slaves."""" What do you mean by that?"" asked Adeimantus. I'll tell you,"" said Socrates. ""The first lot are the sort of people who, like wild beasts, can't bear to be shut up or to live a quiet life, and who won't work unless they are forced to. They are the restless and unruly characters who are born into every city and don't know how to use their leisure properly; when they find themselves left without anyone to look after them they turn into brigands and start ravaging the countryside."""" Yes, indeed,"" said Glaucon. ""And the other part?"" The second class consists of the opposite type of character, who are naturally free men and enjoy freedom, but because they are idle and pleasure-loving they will never work unless they are compelled to do so. Now these latter types are always found in any city, and they are the kind of people who, if they are given authority, make revolutions against the existing constitution and establish a democracy; they are the people who, as Homer says, 'can never remain steady, neither in their thoughts nor in their words'."""" That's quite true,"" said Adeimantus. Well then,"" said Socrates, ""do you imagine that either of these classes is going to be content to live under the rule of the other? No, indeed, and this gives rise to conflict between them."""" Certainly,"" said Adeimantus. " 120 120 "And you know, I said, that the old servants also, who are supposedto be attached to the family, from time to time talk privately inthe same strain to the son; and if they see any one who owes moneyto his father, or is wronging him in any way, and he falls to prosecutethem, they tell the youth that when he grows up he must retaliateupon people of this sort, and be more of a man than his father. Hehas only to walk abroad and he hears and sees the same sort of thing:those who do their own business in the city are called simpletons,and held in no esteem, while the busy-bodies are honoured and applauded.The result is that the young man, hearing and seeing all these thing--hearing too, the words of his father, and having a nearer view ofhis way of life, and making comparisons of him and others --is drawnopposite ways: while his father is watering and nourishing the rationalprinciple in his soul, the others are encouraging the passionate andappetitive; and he being not originally of a bad nature, but havingkept bad company, is at last brought by their joint influence to amiddle point, and gives up the kingdom which is within him to themiddle principle of contentiousness and passion, and becomes arrogantand ambitious. You seem to me to have described his origin perfectly. Then we have now, I said, the second form of government and the secondtype of character? We have. Next, let us look at another man who, as Aeschylus says, @@ -3001,13 +3001,13 @@ I should imagine so. Except a city? --or would you include a city? Nay, he said, This, then, will be the first great defect of oligarchy? Clearly. And here is another defect which is quite as bad. What defect? The inevitable division: such a State is not one, but two States,the one of poor, the other of rich men; and they are living on thesame spot and always conspiring against one another." "Summary: The text discusses the transition from timocracy to oligarchy and the negative effects of wealth on a society. Narrative arc: Exposition -Enunciation: Dialogue between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Active character: The two characters having the conversation" "They are too proud to be greedy. And if you give a timocracy the chance, it always will become an oligarchy in spite of itself."""" You know your Greek mythology,"" I said. ""There's no law against that."""" Well, there is now,"" he said. ""Oligarchy means rich and few; timocracy means rich and many. A democracy gives everyone the right to a certain amount of property; the moment you begin to tax that property, you begin to take away the rights of the people who have it, and the more you tax it, the less they have, until finally you get what the Greeks called an oligarchy or the moderns call a plutocracy; a lot of very rich men running things their own way and to hell with the other ninety-nine percent."""" Do you believe in taxation?"" I asked. I like taxes. If we didn't have them, we'd all be living in caves again and fighting one another for a piece of raw meat or something."""" Why do you like taxes?"" He lit his pipe. Because they're a sign of civilization,"" he said. ""When the government needs money, instead of sending out a gang of thugs to steal it, it asks you politely for it and explains why it wants it. When the government really has to send out thugs, you know it's not a civilized government any more."""" Is that the trouble with this country?"" I asked. ""It's getting uncivilized?"""" It was already uncivilized when I was born,"" he said. ""And it's been getting worse ever since."""" Then what are you doing here?"" Nothing,"" he said. ""I'm just hanging around waiting for somebody to come along and get me out of it."""" But don't you care about anything?"" Not much."" What about your family?"" Oh, them."" He spat on the floor. They're okay,"" he said. ""But they can look after themselves."""" I've got friends,"" he said. ""Some of 'em. But most of 'em are dead or gone."""" I thought you were going to join the Army."" Hell yes."" Are you?"" No."" Why not?"" He grinned at me. """"You think I need a uniform to fight in?"""" I looked at him. He was big enough to wear a uniform. He wasn't handsome, but he had a kind of animal grace. His hands were big and strong. I felt sorry for him. I knew he had killed before, and I was pretty sure he would kill again, but I couldn't see him as a killer. He was looking at me. """"Why did you ask me to meet you tonight?"""" he said. """"I could have stood you up."""" Well, I wanted to talk to you,"" I said. ""About your brother."""" That'll cost you five bucks."" I laughed. Sure,"" I said. ""That's why I brought the money."" We walked back to my car. On the way he told me how much he hated the police. """"They're thieves,"""" he said. """"If you steal from a store or a house, they put you in jail. But if you rob the government, they give you a medal."""" " +Active character: The two characters having the conversation" But that sort of thing was only possible in a timocracy. In an oligarchy it’s quite out of the question, and the reason is that under a timocracy the people are rich, whereas under an oligarchy they are poor.” “I don’t understand,” I said. “Of course you don’t,” he answered. “It’s just one of those things that nobody understands except the experts. You see, under a timocracy the people are rich because they are poor. They’re poor in money, but they’re rich in character. They’re all sportsmen and patriots and chaps like that. Then the tyrant comes along and abolishes all that. He takes away their rights and their privileges and their opportunities for exercising their manhood; and what does he do with the extra wealth that he gets? Why, he gives it to the riff-raff, of course, so that they can put on grand hats and kid gloves and silk socks and things like that. When you’ve got a lot of people going about like that you can imagine how much it costs them in upkeep. Their clothes get torn and their hats get knocked off; they keep losing their gloves and they cut their hands and spoil their nails. And then think of all the dyes and the starch and the boot blacking and the brushes and the laundries and the shoemakers’ bills! Why, you simply have to give these people more money to spend just to keep them from killing themselves. That’s the way it is under a timocracy.” “Well, then,” I asked, “why isn’t it better to be a timocracy than an oligarchy?” “Better!” he repeated. “Better! Why, my God! Don’t you know that a timocracy is the worst kind of hell there is? It’s just like living in a country where the people are always having their teeth extracted. Can you imagine anything worse than that? Why, the whole population would go crazy in a month if they didn’t take chloroform every time they had a tooth out. And yet that’s just the way it is in a timocracy. Every minute you’re afraid somebody’s going to take your rights or your privileges or your opportunities away from you. Why, if you tried to live in a timocracy without chloroform you’d go stark raving mad in three weeks.” “And what happens after the timocracy?” I asked. “After the timocracy,” he replied, “what happens is this: The tyrant runs through his money and has to borrow more from the Jews. Then he starts selling the public property, and the Jews buy it up for him. When he has sold everything he can lay his hands on, and the Jews won’t lend him any more money, why then he begins to squeeze the people. He raises the taxes till everybody is half starved; and when the people rise up against him he shoots them down with cannon and machine guns. 121 121 "That, surely, is at least as bad. Another discreditable feature is, that, for a like reason, they areincapable of carrying on any war. Either they arm the multitude, andthen they are more afraid of them than of the enemy; or, if they donot call them out in the hour of battle, they are oligarchs indeed,few to fight as they are few to rule. And at the same time their fondnessfor money makes them unwilling to pay taxes. How discreditable! And, as we said before, under such a constitution the same personshave too many callings --they are husbandmen, tradesmen, warriors,all in one. Does that look well? Anything but well. There is another evil which is, perhaps, the greatest of all, andto which this State first begins to be liable. @@ -3029,16 +3029,16 @@ By all means. Does not the timocratical man change into the oligarchical on this How? A time arrives when the representative of timocracy has a son: atfirst he begins by emulating his father and walking in his footsteps,but presently he sees him of a sudden foundering against the Stateas upon a sunken reef, and he and all that he has is lost; he mayhave been a general or some other high officer who is brought to trialunder a prejudice raised by informers, and either put to death, orexiled, or deprived of the privileges of a citizen, and all his propertytaken from him. Nothing more likely. And the son has seen and known all this --he is a ruined man, andhis fear has taught him to knock ambition and passion head-foremostfrom his bosom's throne; humbled by poverty he takes to money-makingand by mean and miserly savings and hard work gets a fortune together.Is not such an one likely to seat the concupiscent and covetous elementon the vacant throne and to suffer it to play the great king withinhim, girt with tiara and chain and scimitar?" "Summary: The text discusses the flaws and evils of oligarchies, including their inability to wage war, their love of money, and the presence of poverty and crime. It also explores the transition from timocracy to oligarchy. Narrative arc: Analytical -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation or dialogue Active character: Socrates, Adeimantus Quoted character: Paupers, thieves, cutpurses, robbers Fuzzy place: Unnamed city -Diegetic time: A few minutes" The same is true of oligarchies; they have a few brave and high-spirited persons who are really their strength; but the rest will follow in their track when they are summoned, not merely because they are cowards frightened by hard words, as is asserted, but because they truly believe that to fight is not to the profit of an oligarchy. For men of wealth feeling the strain of taxes, and living off the labour of other men whom they pay and who are therefore their servants, what reason has each individual amongst them to go forth and try to get himself wounded or killed? He may possibly be injured if he stays at home, but he cannot be injured if he goes out; for if victory falls to his enemies he will be sure to escape, and if to himself he will prosper both in life and after death, since he will acquire the property of the slain. Oligarchies also are full of paupers; for all the citizens are rich, but some of them are much richer than others; and these are obliged to be careful and save their money, lest their poverty should make itself apparent. Hence there arises a class of needy men who live upon the oligarchy, and are like drones feeding on honey; they are just as necessary to the State as drones are to a beehive, and they must be borne with. Again, oligarchies are often at war with one another about precedence, and this sort of thing leads to crime and poverty. For men naturally desire to rise higher than they are, and this they can hardly do except by taking part in public affairs; and he who has no part in politics is like a wild beast or bird which has no state. Now in well-to-do families there is seldom any need of theft, but in poor ones there is; and where there is much poverty you are likely to find many crimes. And hence there is a third evil in an oligarchy: for the haves are always plotting against the have-nots because they are afraid of being despoiled of their possessions. This is why Plato says that “oligarchies are more prone to revolution than democracies,” meaning that revolutions in oligarchies are caused by their own internal faults, whereas those in democracies originate in the discontent of the people at the government. The same theory explains why oligarchies are so fond of foreign wars; they think that by creating an outside danger they will be able to prevent the dissensions which threaten them with ruin. But it is difficult for oligarchies to wage successful wars; for they do not dare to trust anybody except themselves and their nearest relatives, and therefore they are unable to raise the large armies and fleets required for great campaigns. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "They are certainly not strong enough to go to war, and yet they will be always setting themselves up as judges of other cities, though they are hardly able to protect themselves. The pretence which they have for doing this is that they are lovers of wisdom ; but their own wisdom should teach them, not only that they are miserable in themselves, but also that they are the least wise of mankind who profess wisdom, but do not cast away self-conceit and vain conceit of knowledge, lest, like a man who is distracted, they should fancy themselves to be ignorant, and yet know all things. They are rich in money, but poor in true riches. They are called fortunate, but they have great misfortunes; they are children, and yet they possess the wisdom of old men ; they are honoured by foreigners, but they dishonour their own country ; they are despised by their own domestics, and hence they are full of envy and hatred ; they are the greatest enemies of their relations ; they are the most unrighteous of men, because they have no regard to law ; they are the most profligate of characters, and yet they love virtue ; they are the vilest of creatures, and yet they call themselves the best of all men."" Adeimantus said : "" You are quite right, Socrates, in saying that they are vile and bad, when you describe them as being rich in money ; but, if poverty comes upon them, then I agree with you that they will become poor in true riches."" Socrates replied : ""Why, surely, that is evident enough ; for poverty is the greatest evil, and the cause of all other evils ; and when it is present, there is nothing which can be wanting except the power of committing crimes."" ""But,"" added Adeimantus, ""there are many thieves and cutpurses in your city, who are everlastingly plotting against the property of others."" ""And who are they ?"" asked Socrates. ""They are the paupers, and the whole class of persons who live on charity."" Socrates laughed heartily at the reply, and said : ""You certainly speak very truly, my dear friend ; but they would never dare to rob an honest person of his goods, nor would they wish to do so, for they are not villains, but honest people ; and even if they were rogues, still they could not rob him, for he has no gold or silver in his possession, and has none of the trinkets which are worn by ladies."" ""That is very true,"" said Adeimantus ; ""but still they are robbers, for they rob the brave men of their souls. They take from them their confidence, their courage, their manhood, and whatever else may be considered a noble quality, and thus they make cowards and slaves of them. " 122 122 "Most true, he replied. And when he has made reason and spirit sit down on the ground obedientlyon either side of their sovereign, and taught them to know their place,he compels the one to think only of how lesser sums may be turnedinto larger ones, and will not allow the other to worship and admireanything but riches and rich men, or to be ambitious of anything somuch as the acquisition of wealth and the means of acquiring it. Of all changes, he said, there is none so speedy or so sure as theconversion of the ambitious youth into the avaricious one. And the avaricious, I said, is the oligarchical youth? Yes, he said; at any rate the individual out of whom he came is likethe State out of which oligarchy came. @@ -3060,14 +3060,14 @@ Very true. Can we any longer doubt, then, that the miser and money-maker answers There can be no doubt. Next comes democracy; of this the origin and nature have still tobe considered by us; and then we will enquire into the ways of thedemocratic man, and bring him up for judgement. That, he said, is our method. Well, I said, and how does the change from oligarchy into democracyarise? Is it not on this wise? --The good at which such a State almsis to become as rich as possible, a desire which is insatiable? What then? The rulers, being aware that their power rests upon their wealth,refuse to curtail by law the extravagance of the spendthrift youthbecause they gain by their ruin; they take interest from them andbuy up their estates and thus increase their own wealth and importance?" "Summary: The text discusses the nature of avaricious individuals and their resemblance to oligarchical states. -Enunciation: Third-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Dialogue Active character: Ambitious youth, avaricious youth, State -Time setting: Contemporary" This ambitious youth was the State. The avaricious youth was the individual who, for his own benefit, would pay anything to keep up the appearance of prosperity. “Why, the whole thing is like an old Greek myth,” he said. “It’s Prometheus and Pandora over again. The State is Prometheus and the individual is Pandora. Prometheus stole fire from heaven for the good of man; but he got punished by having to live in perpetual torment on a rock. And what did Pandora do? Why, she opened her box and let loose all the evils of mankind. Prometheus and Pandora were both rogues. They both stole things which didn’t belong to them. So are the State and the individual. The State steals the strength and energy of the individual and squanders it away in stupid wars and unjust revolutions and sordid schemes of commercial profit. And the individual robs the State of its honour and its dignity by pretending that he doesn’t know when the wheels have come off the machine. He pretends that everything is going well while the whole economic fabric is tottering and ready to fall down about his ears. The State is Prometheus and the individual is Pandora.” I found these reflections rather hardboiled for my taste, so I changed the subject. We began to talk about the war and whether it was really a success or a failure. +Time setting: 1950s" "The ambitious youth, if he were born into a family of wealth and influence, would not be content with the natural advantages of his birth. He would seek to secure the same advantage for his children, and to make them as well off as possible. If he lacked the power to do this by other means, he would have recourse to force, and use it to maintain himself in office until he had secured some method whereby his children could be given a fair start in life. The avaricious youth, if he were born into a family of poverty, would not be satisfied with what little there was. He would take whatever came in his way, and when he found that he could get money by robbing others, he would rob them, and so acquire more than they had left him. In time he would become wealthy; then he would fear to lose what he had gained, and he would use every means in his power to protect his possessions from the greed of others like himself. He would be ready to resort to robbery to save himself from being robbed. If you can find one of these two kinds of individuals who has not made up his mind to kill or be killed, I will give you a gold piece."""" Who are you?"" asked the avaricious youth. A friend,"" said the man. ""I am your friend, because I wish to help you. " 123 123 "To be sure. There can be no doubt that the love of wealth and the spirit of moderationcannot exist together in citizens of the same State to any considerableextent; one or the other will be disregarded. That is tolerably clear. And in oligarchical States, from the general spread of carelessnessand extravagance, men of good family have often been reduced to beggary? Yes, often. And still they remain in the city; there they are, ready to stingand fully armed, and some of them owe money, some have forfeited theircitizenship; a third class are in both predicaments; and they hateand conspire against those who have got their property, and againsteverybody else, and are eager for revolution. @@ -3085,16 +3085,16 @@ Yes, he said, that is the nature of democracy, whether the revolutionhas been ef And now what is their manner of life, and what sort of a governmenthave they? for as the government is, such will be the man." "Summary: The text discusses the relationship between wealth and moderation in a state, as well as the consequences of poverty and inequality on society. Trope: The contrast between the rich and poor Narrative arc: Analysis and discussion of political and social issues -Enunciation: Third-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Dialogue -Literary movement: Enlightenment +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Men of good family, men of business -Time setting: Contemporary -Diegetic time: A few minutes" The men of good family, he said, who had most influence in the state, were those whose moderation was greatest. “He that hath an estate of three hundred a year,” he said, “let him live upon it no better than he that hath but three thousand pounds a year; and he that hath three thousand pounds a year let him live as well as he that has thirty thousand: for then every one shall be contented with what he hath.” This is an excellent rule, thought I, to prevent all contention and uneasiness about riches or poverty, which are the two great springs of all public disorders and calamities; and yet this rule, if rightly understood, would show how absurd and ridiculous the whole scheme of governing the world by politicians is. For to suppose that every man should have so much as will content him, without making any division of property, supposes that every man may have enough; whereas, to govern the world by politicians supposes that there is not enough for every man to be contented with. This, however, I did not tell the honest citizen; but having made him repeat his sentence several times over, I left him, and went up to Mr. Select Justice, who had taken occasion from what passed between us and him to fall into discourse with himself upon the inequality of mankind, and to express his wonder at the smallness of some people’s fortunes, compared with others. “Well, Mr. Justice,” said I, “I am glad to find you here; for, since I came into this country, I have been thinking of a project for your service, which, if it takes, may make your fortune.” “What project is that?” said he. +Time setting: 1950s +Diegetic time: A few minutes" This was a matter of some moment. For, after all, the very richest men in the world are only just richer than other rich men. And these new billionaires were not much richer than the old millionaires of the pre-1950 period. It is quite possible that a few of them had made their money by honest means, or at least by means which no judge would find particularly dishonest. But most of them had made it by methods which could be described as dishonourable only by using a definition which has been obsolete for many years. Dishonesty in business is considered to be equivalent to inefficiency. What matters is that a man makes money; how he does it is his own affair. The men of good family had long ago ceased to make money, and were therefore no longer important. Businessmen were the people who counted now. Their power was almost absolute. They were not even called capitalists any more. They were known simply as Men of Business. When they met together, they did not sit about on sofas and smoke cigarettes. They walked up and down, with their hands behind their backs, like soldiers on parade. This was a military age. So, too, they discussed politics with a stern and martial fervour. They knew what was best for mankind, and they were going to give it to them. Nor was this mere talk. The Men of Business had the power to enforce their will upon the nations, and they used it ruthlessly. There were two things which they abhorred above all others. One was Communism, which meant inefficiency and waste. The other was Democracy, which meant lack of discipline. They set themselves to destroy both, and they succeeded. On the whole, their success had been rather greater against Democracy than against Communism. In fact, they had killed off Democracy altogether except in the form of rubber stamp parliaments which did exactly what they were told. But Communism had also been seriously damaged. A large part of the earth’s surface was still under Communist rule, but only because it was of no use to anyone, except possibly for shooting game. In Europe and North America, however, it had been practically wiped out. Everywhere, dictatorship was established. This suited the Men of Business admirably. It was not easy, however, to get rid of Communism without causing trouble. And there had been trouble enough already. As usual, it had been caused mainly by the proletariat, the scum of the earth. These people were so entirely useless that it seemed absurd to kill them off. Yet they kept on coming into existence, like maggots. Under the present system they were compelled to work, and in certain cases they were even paid wages, though never very large ones. 124 124 "Clearly, he said. In the first place, are they not free; and is not the city full offreedom and frankness --a man may say and do what he likes? 'Tis said so, he replied. And where freedom is, the individual is clearly able to order forhimself his own life as he pleases? Clearly. Then in this kind of State there will be the greatest variety of humannatures? @@ -3110,16 +3110,16 @@ Very good, he said. Is not this the way --he is the son of the miserly and oliga Exactly. And, like his father, he keeps under by force the pleasures whichare of the spending and not of the getting sort, being those whichare called unnecessary? Obviously. Would you like, for the sake of clearness, to distinguish which arethe necessary and which are the unnecessary pleasures? I should. Are not necessary pleasures those of which we cannot get rid, andof which the satisfaction is a benefit to us? And they are rightlyso, because we are framed by nature to desire both what is beneficialand what is necessary, and cannot help it." "Summary: The text discusses the freedom and variety of a certain state, as well as the characteristics of democracy. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation Active character: The speaker, the person being spoken to -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s Fuzzy place: Unnamed city -Diegetic time: A few minutes" """""Yes, it's all that,"""" he said. """"It's freedom and variety; it's like a race-course, and the people in the stands are all betting on you. And I'll tell you something else: It's democracy. A state where there's no law, only force and fraud, is a democracy. You've heard of Solon? He was an Athenian statesman, lived about five hundred years before Christ. When Solon came into power Athens had degenerated into a mob of slave-owners and slaves. There were no more gentlemen, just riff-raff, thugs and murderers. They'd stolen the land from the old nobility and divided it up into small plots which they rented out to tenant farmers. The tenants were slaves who couldn't buy their freedom. Solon started to rule them with an iron hand. He made the laws and enforced them. But his laws were good. The result was that Athens became one of the greatest cities of antiquity."""" I didn't say anything. I was thinking of the little Greek statues in the British Museum. They seemed very beautiful, but they looked so sad. """"Solon died two thousand four hundred years ago,"""" Steve went on. """"Today in this city we still have a Solon. His name is Al Capone."""" I'm afraid I didn't quite get that. """"Sure you did,"""" said Steve. """"I mean it literally. This town has got a Solon, all right, and his name is Al Capone. Now suppose you were to ask me what kind of a man Capone is, I couldn't give you any better description than I gave you of Solon. The Solons always have the same characteristics, and they always arise when civilization becomes decadent. Why? Because the average human being is essentially savage. As long as he's kept under control by force and law he can be civilized, but let him get loose and he goes back to savagery. This city is run by gangsters because it's a degenerate city. The people who live here are savages."""" I admit that Chicago does seem pretty savage sometimes,"""" I said. I tried to think of something else to say, but it wasn't easy. Steve was talking again. He seemed to have forgotten that I was there. I was glad. What I wanted now was time to think things over. """"This town is going to change,"""" he was saying. """"The worst part of it is changing already. That's why the police are after me. Well, they won't get me alive. If they want me they'll have to come and get me. I'll go out fighting. I've got a gun in my pocket and I know how to use it."""" Steve fumbled in his pocket and drew forth a large revolver. " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" I say, it’s a state of mind. A kind of freedom, that’s what it is. You can’t pin it down to any one thing. It’s like the varieties in a circus. You know, when you’re watching them all, one after another, and you don’t care very much for any of them, but you’re enjoying yourself because there’s so much going on? Well, that’s the kind of freedom this place gives you. There’s always something happening, always some show. And you can’t get bored. Not with so many sideshows. That’s what I call freedom. Democracy, if you like.’ He paused. ‘Well, democracy is like that,’ he said. ‘It’s like being at a circus. Take your choice of things to watch. All sorts of people doing all sorts of things. And nobody bothering about you. Nobody caring whether you watch or not. Just as long as you pay your money and don’t break anything.��� ‘That’s right,’ said Mr Raffles. ‘You’re beginning to get the idea.’ The other nodded. ‘Yes,’ he said. ‘I’m beginning to. Yes, it’s like a big fair. Like a holiday. Don’t you think so?’ ‘We aim at it,’ said Mr Raffles. He looked at his wrist-watch. ‘I must be pushing along,’ he said. ‘Bye-bye.’ The other remained where he was, leaning against the wall. ‘Bye-bye,’ he said again. He took out a cigarette-case and lit a cigarette. Then he went on standing there, smoking quietly. He turned his head slowly and glanced through the open door into the room beyond. It was a large, comfortable sitting-room, furnished with heavy old-fashioned pieces. On the table by the window stood a small electric heater, and beside it sat an elderly woman with grey hair. She was knitting, and she did not look up when her visitor appeared in the doorway. He stood for a moment, and then he went into the room. ‘Hallo, mother,’ he said. ‘Sorry to keep you waiting.’ The woman nodded and smiled at him, but she still made no attempt to speak. He walked across the room and stood looking down at her. She raised her eyes to his face and smiled again. ‘Nothing to tell you, darling,’ she said. ‘Everything seems to be going on all right.’ ‘I suppose so,’ he said. ‘Well, let’s hope so, anyway.’ He turned away abruptly and began walking up and down the room. He stopped every now and then, and then started walking again. After a while he came back to the table and leaned over her. ‘Mother,’ he said, ‘why won’t you ever talk to me?’ Her face flushed slightly, but she made no reply. ‘Talk to me, mother,’ he insisted. ‘What’s the matter with you? Can’t you understand English?’ 125 125 "True. We are not wrong therefore in calling them necessary? We are not. And the desires of which a man may get rid, if he takes pains fromhis youth upwards --of which the presence, moreover, does no good,and in some cases the reverse of good --shall we not be right in sayingthat all these are unnecessary? Yes, certainly. Suppose we select an example of either kind, in order that we mayhave a general notion of them? Very good. Will not the desire of eating, that is, of simple food and condiments,in so far as they are required for health and strength, be of thenecessary class? @@ -3139,15 +3139,15 @@ Yes, he said, that is apt to be the way. They draw him to his old associates, an Very true. At length they seize upon the citadel of the young man's soul, whichthey perceive to be void of all accomplishments and fair pursuitsand true words, which make their abode in the minds of men who aredear to the gods, and are their best guardians and sentinels. None better. False and boastful conceits and phrases mount upwards and take theirplace." "Summary: The text discusses the distinction between necessary and unnecessary desires and their effects on the individual. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, interlocutor -Diegetic time: A few minutes" Mythology. The Greeks, who were a race of great philosophers, have told us that there are two gods in the heavens—the one called the Necessary and the other the Unnecessary Jupiter. Now, according to them, when the man who was after his mother’s husband had killed the children of Phoronë, the Unnecessary Jupiter condemned him to wander about the earth for the rest of his days, and the Necessary Jupiter was so pleased with this that he gave him three fine dogs to keep him company. And these dogs were named Lust of Rule, Lust of Gold, and Lust of Women; and from these three dogs sprang all the troubles which afflict mankind. Now, it is clear to me that you have been bitten by one or more of these dogs, for I do not believe that any man would come to my house and beg for money unless he had been bitten by some dog or other. Come, then, tell me which of these dogs has bitten you.” “You are a very amusing person,” said the interlocutor. “And as I am an unacquainted stranger in your city, I don’t mind telling you the truth. I am really hard up for money, but it’s none of these dogs that have bitten me; it’s my wife.” “Your wife!” said Socrates. “What sort of a creature is she?” “She’s a fat, red-faced woman, about forty years old, with yellow hair and little eyes.” “Do you love her?” “No; I hate her.” “Have you ever tried to please her?” “Of course I have.” “And yet she loves another man better than she does you.” “That’s just what I can’t understand.” “Can you not understand it?” said Socrates. “Why, if she loves a man better than you, is it not perfectly reasonable that she should love him best? No doubt you are a very nice fellow, and will make an excellent husband for some woman who likes you better than her husband; but why should this woman like you better than herself?” “I don’t see that at all,” said the interlocutor. “It’s nothing to me whether she likes herself or not. All I want to know is how I can get out of the trouble I am in.” “Is it not true, then, that it is wrong to take that which belongs to another?” “Yes, I suppose so.” “Then, if it is wrong for you to take that which belongs to your neighbor, is it not equally wrong for you to wish for that which belongs to your wife?” “Certainly,” said the interlocutor, beginning to be a little impressed by the wisdom of Socrates. “Then, as you are unable to obtain that which belongs to your wife without making yourself and her unhappy, do you not think it better to be satisfied with that which belongs to yourself, and thus become happy?” +Diegetic time: A few minutes" """""Well, now,"""" said Socrates, """"here is a thing which I think you will find has often come to pass: that you have desired something and got it, only to be miserable after; so that, on the whole, your life has been no better for desiring and getting what you desired."""" Oho!"" said the interlocutor. ""Have you anything to say about that? Why, of course! You know perfectly well that if one hasn't got any money or position in the world, and then goes and gets some, one can always live more comfortably and pleasantly. And as for being miserable afterwards, why, I don't suppose there's such a thing as happiness anywhere at all. Don't you agree with me?"""" Well,"" said Socrates, ""I am not sure whether there is happiness or not. But I do know that I've heard that when people get what they want they are very apt to be unhappy. At least, that's what the poets say, and they ought to know, for they're always writing about happiness and unhappiness. Now, here's another distinction. Some desires are necessary, others aren't. The necessary ones must be satisfied before we can be happy. A man without food and clothes and shelter can't be happy. But once his necessities are supplied, the unnecessary desires begin to make trouble. They lead him into quarrels and crimes. " 126 126 "They are certain to do so. And so the young man returns into the country of the lotus-eaters,and takes up his dwelling there in the face of all men; and if anyhelp be sent by his friends to the oligarchical part of him, the aforesaidvain conceits shut the gate of the king's fastness; and they willneither allow the embassy itself to enter, private if private advisersoffer the fatherly counsel of the aged will they listen to them orreceive them. There is a battle and they gain the day, and then modesty,which they call silliness, is ignominiously thrust into exile by them,and temperance, which they nickname unmanliness, is trampled in themire and cast forth; they persuade men that moderation and orderlyexpenditure are vulgarity and meanness, and so, by the help of a rabbleof evil appetites, they drive them beyond the border. Yes, with a will. And when they have emptied and swept clean the soul of him who isnow in their power and who is being initiated by them in great mysteries,the next thing is to bring back to their house insolence and anarchyand waste and impudence in bright array having garlands on their heads,and a great company with them, hymning their praises and calling themby sweet names; insolence they term breeding, and anarchy liberty,and waste magnificence, and impudence courage. And so the young manpasses out of his original nature, which was trained in the schoolof necessity, into the freedom and libertinism of useless and unnecessarypleasures. Yes, he said, the change in him is visible enough. After this he lives on, spending his money and labour and time onunnecessary pleasures quite as much as on necessary ones; but if hebe fortunate, and is not too much disordered in his wits, when yearshave elapsed, and the heyday of passion is over --supposing that hethen re-admits into the city some part of the exiled virtues, anddoes not wholly give himself up to their successors --in that casehe balances his pleasures and lives in a sort of equilibrium, puttingthe government of himself into the hands of the one which comes firstand wins the turn; and when he has had enough of that, then into thehands of another; he despises none of them but encourages them allequally. @@ -3161,12 +3161,12 @@ Clearly. And does not tyranny spring from democracy in the same manner as democr How? The good which oligarchy proposed to itself and the means by whichit was maintained was excess of wealth --am I not right? Yes. And the insatiable desire of wealth and the neglect of all other thingsfor the sake of money-getting was also the ruin of oligarchy? True. And democracy has her own good, of which the insatiable desire bringsher to dissolution?" "Summary: The text discusses the actions and consequences of a young man who follows his own desires and neglects moderation and virtue. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy" If you think that if I had been out of the way, and they had known that they could have got at your money without my finding it out, they would have left me alone! I tell you this, that there is no friendship in the world now, or no moderation. Everything is as hard as steel, and all men's desires are like knives. For, since you have done nothing but follow your own will, and pleasure, and desire, without choosing anything which was noble, and good, and just; and therefore you have neglected virtue, how can you wonder if you meet with harm? Or do you suppose that any one is going to guard your property for you, who knows that you yourself do not value it highly? Or do you expect a man to take care of another man's things when he sees that he takes no care of them himself? Or do you imagine that if you live like a slave, and a beast, and a wild animal, you will be treated by other men as if you were a free man, and a gentleman, and a man of sense? And what is more ridiculous than to see you blaming others, when you yourself are the cause of your misfortunes? For you ought to blame yourself first of all, because you are so blind and foolish as not to know that you ought to give up your pleasures, and your desires, and your friends, and your property, for the sake of justice and temperature; and you ought to blame yourself next because you did not choose the best course, nor try to make yourself good; but on the contrary, you devoted yourself entirely to what is evil, and followed your own unreasonable desires; and yet you are surprised, you say, that you find nothing good in your life; and that you are robbed of everything that you possess! +Literary movement: Hardboiled" My heart stood still. My throat went dry. I had to clear my tongue before I could speak. “Now, then,” he said. “If you’re afraid of me, say so. If you’ve got any idea that I’m going to lay into you, forget it. What I want to know is, how did you get in here? And what are you doing with your pants off?” It was hard for me to find words. When I finally managed to speak, it was just like this: “I followed you.” He looked at me for a long time without saying anything. Then he laughed. “You’re a cool one,” he said. “But listen, mister, you don’t know who you’re up against. If you think you can mix it with me and come out on top, you’re making a big mistake.” “You’ll be surprised,” I said. “I didn’t come down here to fight you. I came because I wanted to see you again. You gave me the blues when I left you yesterday, and last night I couldn’t sleep. I couldn’t stand it. So I came back.” “You certainly took your time,” he said. “What do you mean by that?” I asked. “Just what I said. You didn’t even give me time to shave or comb my hair. Don’t you remember? You barged right in before I’d got dressed.” “You told me to come back,” I said. “Didn’t you?” “Sure,” he said. “And I meant it. But you don’t have to rush things, do you?” He picked up his pants and started putting them on. “Where were you all day?” he asked as he buttoned them up. “At home.” “With your mother?” “No. She’s away visiting friends. In the country somewhere.” “Who were you with, then?” “Nobody.” “Why?” “Why not?” “There must be a reason.” “Maybe.” “You’re always saying ‘maybe.’” He finished buttoning his fly and turned around. “Well, if there is a reason, maybe you’ll tell me about it some time. Or maybe you won’t.” “I might,” I said. “Don’t keep saying ‘maybe.’” “It’s good enough for you, isn’t it?” “Yes, but I don’t use it every other word.” “Oh, shut up!” “All right, wise guy,” he said. “I was only trying to help you.” “Help me! You’re no help to anybody. You’re a pain in the neck.” “I’m not a pain in the neck.” “You are too. And you’re a liar besides.” “Am I?” “Yes, you are.” “How do you know?” “Because I know.” “You don’t know anything.” “I know a lot of things.” “Like what?” “Like why you’re always walking up and down the street outside our house.” “That’s none of your business.” “I wish you wouldn’t follow me around.” “I wish you wouldn’t make me.” “Make you! What do you mean, make you?” 127 127 "What good? Freedom, I replied; which, as they tell you in a democracy, is theglory of the State --and that therefore in a democracy alone willthe freeman of nature deign to dwell. Yes; the saying is in everybody's mouth. I was going to observe, that the insatiable desire of this and theneglect of other things introduces the change in democracy, whichoccasions a demand for tyranny. How so? When a democracy which is thirsting for freedom has evil cupbearerspresiding over the feast, and has drunk too deeply of the strong wineof freedom, then, unless her rulers are very amenable and give a plentifuldraught, she calls them to account and punishes them, and says thatthey are cursed oligarchs. @@ -3184,14 +3184,14 @@ Glorious indeed, he said. But what is the next step? The ruin of oligarchy is th True. The excess of liberty, whether in States or individuals, seems onlyto pass into excess of slavery. Yes, the natural order. And so tyranny naturally arises out of democracy, and the most aggravatedform of tyranny and slavery out of the most extreme form of liberty?" "Summary: The text discusses the consequences of democracy and the potential for tyranny to arise from it. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Enlightenment -Active character: Two characters engaged in conversation" "The first is that a man who does not believe in the existence of God or any kind of authority, human or divine, will always be a rebel. That is as true as gravity. The second is that it is very hard for a nation of rebels to be governed, and when they try they get into some mess. What I mean is this: if you do away with God you must do away with all government. If there is no higher power than the people there is no law but the will of the majority. And what is the will of the majority? Simply this, to have their own way. They want everything just as they like it. And so they set up the idols of their own imagination. They make gods of themselves and their own desires, and then they worship them. The result is anarchy. Men hate each other; they murder and rob; they break up families; they do anything rather than give in to anybody else's wishes. It is the same thing that we see going on here."""" But,"" I protested, ""you don't know America. You never have been there. There are thousands of happy homes, decent, well-behaved families, quiet, respectable people everywhere. Can they all be deceiving you?"""" Oh, yes,"" he said grimly. ""They are deceived themselves. They imagine that they are free because they are allowed to vote and to think what they please. But they are slaves every whit as much as those poor wretches down there in the mines. Look at our young men! How many of them ever read Virgil or Homer or Plato? How many of them can tell you the difference between a lyre and a lute? How many of them can even speak two languages?"""" Not many,"" I admitted. Then why should they expect to understand our classics?"" Do you suppose that a pig would appreciate music? Or a horse?"" No,"" I said, ""I don't suppose they would."" Then how can you expect American pigs and horses to understand Greek literature?"" It was a pretty hard hit, and I didn't say anything. I thought about it for a while, however, and then I said: Well, look here, friend. It seems to me that I remember something about your country once being governed by a democracy just like ours. Don't you suppose that if it was bad enough to be overthrown it might be good enough for us too?"""" So it was,"" he replied. ""It was overthrown, but not by a monarchy or a dictatorship. It was overthrown by a military despotism. Now which will you have?"""" A military despotism!"" I exclaimed. ""Why, that's the worst form of government in the world. Why, that's pure tyranny."""" Yes,"" he said, ""that's what they call it now. But what did they call it in Greece?"""" " +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: Two characters engaged in conversation" "If you're satisfied with the way things are, fine. But don't think it's going to last forever. Democracy won't last long in this country if you keep up the kind of talk we've been hearing."""" The other man nodded and smiled an ironic smile. It was a cold smile, as though he had discovered something that made everything else look ridiculous. You know, I have a feeling you might be right,"" he said. ""I have a feeling you might be very right."""" They had reached the spot where the car was parked, and the older man got into the front seat. He looked up at the younger man. I'm not really a pessimist, you know,"" he said. """"And if things go wrong, there are always people like you who can take over and run things."""" He started the motor. All right,"" he said. ""See you later."" And then he added: """"When you get through playing soldier."""" As the car pulled away, the young man stood in the road and watched it until it was out of sight. Then he turned and walked slowly back toward the house. He passed the porch without looking at it. When he came to the steps he stopped and took off his hat. He stood there for several minutes without moving. A slight breeze lifted his hair and blew against his forehead. At last he opened the screen door and went into the house. Chapter 3 Now you boys sit here and be good while I go into the kitchen and get some cookies,"" Mrs. Mifflin said. She looked at the three men sitting on the porch. They were all wearing straw hats. Their faces were burned red by the sun. One of them was holding a fishing rod. The other two had books. They sat quietly, without talking, while she went into the house. Two of them were watching her walk across the porch. She stopped at the corner and looked back at them. Then she disappeared into the house. The boy with the fishing rod put down his rod and leaned forward in his chair. He glanced at the other two men and grinned. Well, boys,"" he said. ""What do you say we see how many of those cookies we can eat before she comes back?"""" No!"" both the others shouted in unison. One of them laughed, but they were all watching Mrs. Mifflin when she came back onto the porch carrying a plate of cookies. She placed the plate on the railing. Her eyes were smiling, but she didn't say anything. For a moment no one moved or spoke. Then all three men grabbed for the plate. They tore it from her hands and began shoving each other. One of them fell backward into the hammock. Another pushed the third man, and he stumbled and fell on the floor. Mrs. Mifflin laughed loudly. She clapped her hands and rubbed them together. After a few moments the fight ended, and they all calmed down. The boy in the hammock sat up and picked up his hat. " 128 128 "As we might expect. That, however, was not, as I believe, your question-you rather desiredto know what is that disorder which is generated alike in oligarchyand democracy, and is the ruin of both? Just so, he replied. Well, I said, I meant to refer to the class of idle spendthrifts,of whom the more courageous are the-leaders and the more timid thefollowers, the same whom we were comparing to drones, some stingless,and others having stings. A very just comparison. These two classes are the plagues of every city in which they aregenerated, being what phlegm and bile are to the body. And the goodphysician and lawgiver of the State ought, like the wise bee-master,to keep them at a distance and prevent, if possible, their ever comingin; and if they have anyhow found a way in, then he should have themand their cells cut out as speedily as possible. @@ -3216,17 +3216,17 @@ Yes, that is quite clear. How then does a protector begin to change into a tyran What tale? The tale is that he who has tasted the entrails of a single humanvictim minced up with the entrails of other victims is destined tobecome a wolf. Did you never hear it?" "Summary: The speaker discusses the presence of idle spendthrifts in both oligarchy and democracy, their negative impact on society, and how they can turn into tyrants. Trope: The corrupting influence of power Narrative arc: Exposition and analysis -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Enlightenment +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The speaker and the person being addressed -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "I've seen plenty of idle spendthrifts in my time, and I know just how they are. You get an idea into your head that you're going to make a fortune some day, and then, when the money comes along, you sit around waiting for it to multiply like rabbits instead of putting it out to work."""" He opened his eyes wide. """"How many times have you seen that happen?"""" Well, let's see. Take our own town, for instance. I can remember three cases right off hand. There was Jimmy McGraw back in '95 who won ten thousand in a poker game up in New York. He spent about four years in Europe and the South Seas, and when he came back he had less than two thousand left. Then there was Wally Fox, who got the insurance money from his father after he died, and went on a wild spree. He gave all but about twenty thousand to a couple of swindlers who were running a fake mining company out in Colorado. And then there was Oliver Manners, who married the daughter of a millionaire. His wife squandered most of her father's money before she died, and then he got hold of a big bundle from his mother-in-law. He bought several race-horses, a yacht, and an airplane. It took him eight years to blow it all, and then he shot himself."""" The stranger was staring at him with an expression of growing wonderment. Finally he said: Well, sir, if those men you've mentioned were loafers who didn't amount to anything, why should their fate interest me?"""" Because,"" replied the other, ""they will not be alone very long. As sure as you live, every man you meet will be one of them. You will find them in the highest positions, ruling over kings and nations. They will be oligarchs, democrats, or tyrants. But whether they rule by force or consent, they will always exhibit the same characteristics; the same lust for power, the same arrogance, the same recklessness, and the same brutal cruelty."""" You seem to be talking about a peculiar brand of humanity,"" the stranger said. """"Who are they? Where do they come from?"""" They come from everywhere,"" replied the other. ""They may be found in every country, in every race, in every age. They are not born of royal blood nor is any caste privileged above another in giving them birth. They are the children of the gods, and they are known as the Sons of Thunder."""" The visitor frowned. """"I don't understand you,"""" he said. """"What are you driving at?"""" Nothing,"" replied the other. ""Only that you ought to be more careful who you talk to. I'm only an old tramp, but I have been a soldier in my time, and I know something about people."""" Yes, yes,"" said the stranger quickly. ""I beg your pardon. " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "Because these were the very people who had been bought, or who could be bought. The idle spendthrifts in an oligarchy and the idle spendthrifts in a democracy. The men who did not work but lived on what they had inherited from their fathers or what they had stolen from somebody else. It was the same type of man in both cases, and when he was living in a democracy he was just as dangerous as when he was living in an oligarchy. Because the same type of man is always dangerous wherever you find him; and because he can always get his way. In an oligarchy he gets it by blackmailing those above him and being blackmailed by those below him; in a democracy he gets it by becoming the leader of a mob, and the mob always leads its leaders. There are only two ways to stop him: one of them is to put him to work doing something useful, and the other is to kill him. I've done both with a few of them, and it doesn't really matter which you do."""" The door opened again, and the tall girl came back into the room. She was carrying an attache-case. It was about three feet long, and made of some kind of brown leather. She set it down on a chair beside the desk and looked at Strickland. He nodded towards the telephone. """"Put it through,"""" he said. She picked up the receiver and dialed a number. Then she handed the receiver to Strickland. It's for you,"" she said. Yes?"" Strickland said into the mouthpiece. ""Oh, yes. That's fine. Thank you very much. I'll be there."" He replaced the receiver and turned towards the girl. """"What time is it?"""" he asked. Half-past twelve,"" she said. All right. Thanks for your help. You can go now."""" She hesitated, and then glanced towards the girl who was still sitting in the armchair. Strickland followed her eyes. """"You can go too,"""" he said. """"I shan't want you any more today."""" The tall girl crossed the room and touched the shorter girl on the shoulder. The latter stood up, and then she saw Strickland looking at her. Her face went white, and she began to tremble violently. For a moment Strickland thought that she might faint. Then she found her voice. I'm sorry, Mr. Strickland,"" she said. ""I forgot my bag. It's in the cloakroom downstairs."""" Don't worry about it,"" Strickland said. ""You can come and fetch it tomorrow morning. It'll be all right here tonight."""" She went out of the room without another word. As soon as the door had closed behind her Strickland turned to the tall girl. """"You'd better take a taxi home,"""" he said. """"It's late, and I don't know when I shall be back."""" " 129 129 "Oh, yes. And the protector of the people is like him; having a mob entirelyat his disposal, he is not restrained from shedding the blood of kinsmen;by the favourite method of false accusation he brings them into courtand murders them, making the life of man to disappear, and with unholytongue and lips tasting the blood of his fellow citizen; some he killsand others he banishes, at the same time hinting at the abolitionof debts and partition of lands: and after this, what will be hisdestiny? Must he not either perish at the hands of his enemies, orfrom being a man become a wolf --that is, a tyrant? Inevitably. This, I said, is he who begins to make a party against the rich? The same. After a while he is driven out, but comes back, in spite of his enemies,a tyrant full grown. @@ -3247,16 +3247,16 @@ Yes, that may be expected. And the tyrant, if he means to rule, must get rid of He cannot. And therefore he must look about him and see who is valiant, who ishigh-minded, who is wise, who is wealthy; happy man, he is the enemyof them all, and must seek occasion against them whether he will orno, until he has made a purgation of the State." "Summary: The text discusses the rise of a tyrant and the consequences it has on the people. Trope: The tyrant who turns on his own people Narrative arc: Political commentary -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic dialogue +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The protector of the people, the tyrant -Time setting: Contemporary -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "Do you think that when the protector of the people has become a tyrant he will take any chances?"""" I am not so sure,"" I said. ""I have read the story of Theseus, and it seems to me he had just enough time to get into his armor before the Minotaur got him."""" Oh, yes; but that's Greek mythology. It's all about these days."""" The man from Vermont smiled tolerantly. """"You're an innocent, Mr. Wolfe. They tell me this country is great because it's young, but we've still got some old ideas. We believe in paying our debts. But we also believe that if a man crosses us once, he'll cross us again. That's why we don't trust banks or railroads or movie companies or even newspapers. The trouble with you guys is that you got no sense of history."""" I was trying to remember what history had done for the Greeks, but I couldn't. I said: """"It seems to me there ought to be some way of keeping him under control."""" The man from Vermont chuckled. """"That's rich! Do you know who's going to keep him under control? His wife, that's who!"""" And now I began to see how it would work out. Of course, he would marry her. He had already spent two thousand dollars on her, and he could hardly afford to let that go for nothing. Then the honeymoon would be over, and she would be left alone with him in that castle of his up on the hillside, while he was off at his club drinking brandy and soda. In three weeks she would be ready to commit suicide, and then where would he be? A nice spot for a guy like that to be in. Why, by Godfrey, it was beautiful. I turned to Wolfe. """"What do you think, Mr. Wolfe?"""" he asked. Wolfe nodded. """"Very neat,"""" he said. * * * * * Wolfe and I were driving back toward the city in the sedan, with Wolfe behind the wheel and me stretched out across the back seat. When we were clear of the village Wolfe turned around on the seat. """"Well,"""" he said, """"what do you think of it?"""" I thought about it for a minute. """"The only flaw I can see,"""" I said, """"is that there might be no heirs. What if he's been married before?"""" Wolfe shook his head. """"No. If I'm right he's never married. At least, never legally."""" Well?"" I said. ""Then what?"" Nothing,"" said Wolfe. ""It's too much of a coincidence."" " +Time setting: 1950s +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "The protector of the people turned tyrant, and his own people turned on him. They had it coming to them all right; I'll give you that. But there were a lot of innocent bystanders who got caught in the crossfire."""" The conversation went on like this for another minute or two, but the details weren't important. They weren't anything, anyway. They were just words, and they didn't have any meaning anymore, not even to the people saying them. It was like something out of an old movie, one of those Hitchcock things with titles at the bottom of the screen explaining what was going on, only in this case the titles would be """"Waste"""" and """"Inanity"""" and """"Futility."""" There was something else that was the same as in the movies, and that was the way they felt when they got up and left. It was like when you see the hero get away from the bad guys after a terrific chase scene, only instead of having a happy ending you know that sooner or later he's going to get nailed again. Like the time the guy in Psycho gets away from the cops and drives off down the road, but you know he's going to go back and kill somebody else because he can't help it. That's the way we felt about ourselves. We couldn't help being dumb and stupid and getting into messes we couldn't get out of. It was our fate. And the only thing worse than knowing you're going to get killed is not knowing when it's going to happen. You can't plan for it. " 130 130 "Yes, he said, and a rare purgation. Yes, I said, not the sort of purgation which the physicians make ofthe body; for they take away the worse and leave the better part,but he does the reverse. If he is to rule, I suppose that he cannot help himself. What a blessed alternative, I said: --to be compelled to dwell onlywith the many bad, and to be by them hated, or not to live at all! @@ -3282,17 +3282,17 @@ And when these fail? Why, clearly, he said, then he and his boon companions, whe You mean to say that the people, from whom he has derived his being,will maintain him and his companions? Yes, he said; they cannot help themselves. But what if the people fly into a passion, and aver that a grown-upson ought not to be supported by his father, but that the father shouldbe supported by the son? The father did not bring him into being,or settle him in life, in order that when his son became a man heshould himself be the servant of his own servants and should supporthim and his rabble of slaves and companions; but that his son shouldprotect him, and that by his help he might be emancipated from thegovernment of the rich and aristocratic, as they are termed. And sohe bids him and his companions depart, just as any other father mightdrive out of the house a riotous son and his undesirable associates. By heaven, he said, then the parent will discover what a monster hehas been fostering in his bosom; and, when he wants to drive him out,he will find that he is weak and his son strong." "Summary: The text discusses the nature of tyranny and the consequences of having a tyrant rule over a city-state. -Enunciation: Dialogue between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Enlightenment +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Two speakers -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "It's like this. We call it the law of the jungle, but it's more than that. It's a natural law. The weak are meat and the strong do what they like with the weak. You can't evade or get away from it. That's why we have tyrants. To save us from other tyrants."""" He paused to light his pipe. When he spoke again there was a new note in his voice. """"I'm not saying it's right,"""" he said. """"I don't know whether it's right or wrong. But I know it's so. And the man who tries to break through is a fool. He breaks himself against it. Look at that poor devil of yours. He wanted to be just and upright. And where has he got to? In a lunatic asylum. He'd have done better to keep clear of the whole thing. Leave well alone. It's like one of those snakes that you find in the tropics. If you touch them they strike at you."""" There was a silence. Then Ericson said: No. You haven't told me about the Tyrant yet."" Oh, yes. Well, he represents the power of nature. The ideal Greek is the perfect athlete, with all his muscles developed. He loves physical exertion and he wants to see something of the same type as himself, somebody whom he can admire and respect and whose orders he will obey without question. That's what the Tyrant stands for. He embodies the strength of the state. He personifies the law of the jungle."""" And is he always an evil spirit?"" Yes, always. He's the oppressor, the cruel and despotic ruler. He hates beauty and intelligence and everything that is high and noble. He represents the dark side of human nature. He's always a sort of Gorgon. He has the Gorgon's head on his shield."""" And if he were dead?"" Well, then he would represent death, wouldn't he? Death is the tyrant, the force which stops life and makes an end of things."""" Why does he have to be killed?"" Because the hero must fight him. And the hero is the lover. He represents the creative principle."""" You mean that love and death are connected together somehow?"" Certainly. Love is the one thing that makes life worth living. Life would be nothing without it. And yet love is suffering. Think of Orpheus and Eurydice. Think of Adonis and Aphrodite. Think of yourself and your wife. Wasn't it hell to live with her?"""" Yes, it was hell,"" said Ericson, ""but I don't agree with you about love being suffering."""" You're a damned liar,"" said Lomas, and began to laugh. ""I'll give you something else to laugh about before long."""" I hope you will,"" said Ericson. ""But how do you make love and death fit together?"""" Lomas took out his pipe and knocked the ashes out. " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "Yes. He's that kind of a guy."""" You see?"" I said to Lew. ""The man is a monster, and the people adore him."""" They do,"" he said. ""You'll have to admit he's got a certain power. If you were a Greek what would you do?"""" I'd fight like hell."" Maybe you would,"" Lew said, ""but what about the other nine hundred ninety-nine out of a thousand? You can't expect them all to be heroes. There's not enough Greek blood left in this city. The only thing they know about is paying taxes."""" Well, what would you do?"" I said. ""If you lived here?"" I'm an American,"" he said. ""I'd leave town."""" You're no Greek,"" I said. ""But if you had to stay here what would you do?"""" I'd take to the mountains,"" he said. ""I wouldn't hang around here waiting for the end."""" What end?"" It's coming,"" he said. ""This guy is going to break something some day. And when he does it's going to be bad."""" But what will he break?"" Anything,"" Lew said. ""He's a human being. They always break something. And then you've got to pay for it. That's where the end comes in."""" Are you sure he's going to break?"" I said. Sure he's going to break,"" Lew said. ""It's just a matter of time."""" [Illustration] CHAPTER 7 The End The same day I went up to Tony Balzani's house in Beverly Hills. Mr. Balzani was at home. He was reading the afternoon paper and drinking a glass of beer. He put the paper down when I came in, but he didn't get up or offer me a chair. I sat down on the couch. Mr. Balzani looked me over carefully. Then he picked up his paper again. I don't remember what paper it was. A tabloid. It had a lot of pictures of girls and a couple of murders. I didn't think much of it myself. Do you read it?"" I said. He shrugged. """"It's good for my digestion."""" I took out my notebook. """"I want to ask you some questions about Helen Reed."""" He nodded his head slowly. """"She was a nice girl."""" Yes, she was,"" I said. ""Did you know her father, Arthur Reed?"""" No."" Did you know Mr. Ryan?"" I asked. ""Her stepfather?"" I've seen him. Not often."" Have you ever been to their house?"" Only once. To dinner."""" Was that with Miss Reed?"" Yes."" Do you know anything about her private life?"" Mr. Balzani shook his head. """"I know nothing about anybody's private life except my own."""" " 131 131 "Why, you do not mean to say that the tyrant will use violence? What!beat his father if he opposes him? Yes, he will, having first disarmed him. Then he is a parricide, and a cruel guardian of an aged parent; andthis is real tyranny, about which there can be no longer a mistake:as the saying is, the people who would escape the smoke which is theslavery of freemen, has fallen into the fire which is the tyrannyof slaves. Thus liberty, getting out of all order and reason, passesinto the harshest and bitterest form of slavery. True, he said. Very well; and may we not rightly say that we have sufficiently discussedthe nature of tyranny, and the manner of the transition from democracyto tyranny? @@ -3311,15 +3311,15 @@ I quite agree. In saying this I have been running into a digression; but the poi Yes, I agree. And now remember the character which we attributed to the democraticman. He was supposed from his youth upwards to have been trained undera miserly parent, who encouraged the saving appetites in him, butdiscountenanced the unnecessary, which aim only at amusement and ornament? True. And then he got into the company of a more refined, licentious sortof people, and taking to all their wanton ways rushed into the oppositeextreme from an abhorrence of his father's meanness. At last, beinga better man than his corruptors, he was drawn in both directionsuntil he halted midway and led a life, not of vulgar and slavish passion,but of what he deemed moderate indulgence in various pleasures. Afterthis manner the democrat was generated out of the oligarch?" "Summary: The text discusses the nature of tyranny and the transition from democracy to tyranny, as well as the appetites and desires that drive human behavior. Narrative arc: Exposition -Enunciation: Dialog between Socrates and Adeimantus -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic dialogue +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, Adeimantus -Time setting: Contemporary" “Let us begin again and say that the whole body of a State is the best judge of what the part in it should do. Is not this true?” “Certainly,” he replied. “Then if a State or city is like an individual, are we right in saying that when the best men rule in a city, those who are not of the best, but only good, are made their allies, and work in unison with them? ” “Why not?” “Why, because a man who is really good or well disposed towards a government cannot have his mind fixed on anything so mean as money; he would be more likely to desire honour and command.” “Yes,” he said, “that is much more his style.” “What then,” I said, “of the other class—may we not similarly suppose them to be drawn towards the tyranny by the motive of fear?—they have nothing to hope for from him, but they fear injury and hypocrisely flatter him.” “Very true,” he said. “And are there not deserters from both these classes—who go over to the side of oligarchy and tyranny? I mean a portion of the noble and also of the rich—the third class in the State?” “There are,” he said. “Well,” I said, “and are there not poor men in the fourth class—there are sure to be many of them, and they will naturally follow their leaders, whoever they may be?” “They certainly will.” “Then if these three classes are drawn along after the middle class, the four lower classes will never intervene; for they will not imitate the dissensions of the higher, but rather follow after them. Wherefore there will be no difference between them except in wealth and poverty, and they will be two cities, one of which will be poor and the other rich: the one living upon its own resources, the other derived from another.” “That is likely enough.” “Then according to you, he who would be a perfect guardian of the law is just, and, if any harm happen to the laws through his fault, is a criminal?” “Yes, that is what I think.” “See now,” I said, “if my proposition will not be established by reason as well as opinion,—that the love of money is the source of all the disorders which take place in States.” “How so?” “Do you think that tamperings with the religion of the higher classes, parents, family, and the State, can arise except from want of money? The gods alone shall be allowed to enjoy; to them we will devoting the sacrifices: and as for the rest, let them derive their entire subsistence from their labour, nor shall we receive them as fellow companions.” This was our fashion of speaking. +Time setting: 1950s" Well, then, is not the way to make tyranny possible in a state simply to have the people always busy and at their work when they are not serving in the fields? For example, when the farmer is planting seed in his land, or watering it, he must be told that this is no time for him to go into the city to talk of justice and injustice; and he has got to be told that if he likes to drink small beer and eat doughy cakes, and would like to see his wife dressed in a long gown, he must leave all these matters to the poets and the subtle wordsmiths. If, however, he wants to win honour and renown among the Hellenes, and to set up a pillar by his father's grave, with an inscription saying that he overthrew the Persians, he must take a spear, and endure hardships, and have something of the soldier in his disposition. The same rule holds good of all other arts and crafts: wherever you find men working they must not be allowed to think about anything else. And yet again, we cannot allow them to live without any employment; they must have some work which will occupy them without allowing them leisure to fall into mischief. I fancy that you understand what I mean?' Yes, Socrates,' said Adeimantus; 'and I know that you are right.' Very well then,' he said, 'the first thing that we shall have to do will be to compel the poets to sing only about war and the other works of warlike men.' But how can you prevent them from singing about peace as well?' 132 132 "Yes, he said; that was our view of him, and is so still. And now, I said, years will have passed away, and you must conceivethis man, such as he is, to have a son, who is brought up in his father'sprinciples. I can imagine him. Then you must further imagine the same thing to happen to the sonwhich has already happened to the father: --he is drawn into a perfectlylawless life, which by his seducers is termed perfect liberty; andhis father and friends take part with his moderate desires, and theopposite party assist the opposite ones. As soon as these dire magiciansand tyrant-makers find that they are losing their hold on him, theycontrive to implant in him a master passion, to be lord over his idleand spendthrift lusts --a sort of monstrous winged drone --that isthe only image which will adequately describe him. @@ -3341,15 +3341,15 @@ Very true. And if he fails, then he will use force and plunder them. Yes, probably. And if the old man and woman fight for their own, what then, my friend?Will the creature feel any compunction at tyrannizing over them?" "Summary: The text discusses the character of a man who is drawn into a lawless life and becomes a tyrant. Trope: The corrupting influence of power Narrative arc: Tragic downfall -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Enlightenment or classical literature +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The man, his son -Diegetic time: A few minutes" The man had, in fact, been drawn into lawless life by the natural fascination which such a life has for one of his type, and he had become a tyrant through the weakness which is always the most fatal of the passions. “I suppose you have heard that your father killed himself?” I asked him. “Yes.” “He was my friend, you know,” I said. “That is why I ask you to remember that I am speaking as a friend when I say that it is not well to talk like that about him even here. He was a great man, and there is no need to use coarse words of him.” The son made an impatient gesture with his hand. “Have you seen his body?” “No.” “You will find it in the bath of his bedroom at the back. I saw it this morning when I came down here from Paris after the funeral. It was lying in the bath with its face under water, and the water was red. There were two cuts on the neck.” “How did you know it was murder?” “The water was red.” I laughed. “That’s Greek to me,” I said. “I’m afraid I can’t follow you.” “It is simple enough. A cut, made with a blunt knife, will leave a cut which will bleed freely; but if a sharp knife is used, the blood vessels are severed, and the blood spurts out. In that case there will be very little blood in the water, because the spurt sends the blood some distance away. A person who cuts his throat with a blunt knife will die almost immediately, and before any blood can be spilt; but a person who uses a sharp knife will live long enough to lose a lot of blood, and therefore the water in the bath will be red. That is all.” “I see,” I said. “And you think that whoever killed him cut his throat with a blunt knife?” “Of course.” “Why?” “Because my father was not killed in a hurry. He was killed slowly, by inches, over a period of time. You don’t kill a man like that quickly with a sharp knife. And besides, he must have known that he was going to be killed, and would have made preparations. He kept a collection of knives in a drawer in his study, and it is certain that he would have chosen one of those, because they were all sharp. No, he was killed by someone who took a blunt knife from the kitchen without thinking what it was for, and cut his throat. It was not a premeditated crime, and it was committed by someone who had no idea how to do it properly.” “I see,” I said again. “But why should he want to kill him?” “Because he hated him.” “Who hated him?” “My father, of course.” “But why should he hate him?” “Because he was a brute.” +Diegetic time: A few minutes" The man was short, thickset and powerful, with a round red face from which the hair was disappearing. He had a black moustache that drooped over his mouth. His eyes were deep-set under heavy brows, and they looked as though they could see through you and your clothes at the same time. They frightened me like hell. “You’re a bad lot,” he said. “You’d better believe it.” I began to wonder if he could read my mind. “We don’t want any more trouble here,” he went on. “I’m going to tell you what’s going to happen. You’re going to give us no more trouble. If you do, we’ll get you out of the way for good. Understand? We’ve got the power to do that, and we’re going to use it. It won’t be much fun for you, but it will be funnier for us. That’s all.” He turned away, and I felt myself grow limp all over. The strength seemed to go out of me. I think I may have wanted to burst into tears. My son stood beside me. There was an awful silence in the room while I fought against being sick. Then the door opened again, and the fat man came back in. He was holding something in his hand. It was the roll of banknotes I had taken from the suitcase. He took one out and held it up. “This is a five-pound note,” he said. “You see it?” I nodded. “Good,” he said. “Now listen carefully. I’m going to ask you some questions. You must answer them. If you don’t answer them, or if you try to dodge them, you know what’s going to happen. Understand?” Again I nodded. “All right,” he said. “How much money have you got now?” “About thirty shillings,” I said. He smiled. “That’s not very much,” he said. “But it doesn’t matter. When you’ve got a bit more, come and see me again.” He put the banknote back in the roll and put the roll in his pocket. Then he turned and walked out of the room. I sat down on a chair, and I realized that I was trembling all over. There was a knock on the door, and my son came in. He looked scared to death. “What did he say to you?” he asked. “He told me I was a bad lot,” I said. “And he said if I gave him any more trouble he’d get rid of me. And he said he’d have me out of the way for good. And then he made me count out all the money I had, and he said when I’d got some more I was to come and see him again.” My son sat down in the chair by the table. He looked white and ill. “It’s terrible,” he said. “It’s horrible. 133 133 "Nay, he said, I should not feel at all comfortable about his parents. But, O heavens! Adeimantus, on account of some newfangled love ofa harlot, who is anything but a necessary connection, can you believethat he would strike the mother who is his ancient friend and necessaryto his very existence, and would place her under the authority ofthe other, when she is brought under the same roof with her; or that,under like circumstances, he would do the same to his withered oldfather, first and most indispensable of friends, for the sake of somenewly found blooming youth who is the reverse of indispensable? Yes, indeed, he said; I believe that he would. Truly, then, I said, a tyrannical son is a blessing to his fatherand mother. @@ -3364,17 +3364,17 @@ Exactly. When such men are only private individuals and before they get power,th Yes, truly. They are always either the masters or servants and never the friendsof anybody; the tyrant never tastes of true freedom or friendship." "Summary: The text discusses the actions and character of a tyrannical son and his effects on his family. Trope: Tyrant son Narrative arc: Analysis and discussion -Enunciation: Dialogue between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Dialogue -Literary movement: Plato's philosophical writings +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Adeimantus, tyrannical son Quoted work: Cretan saying about beating one's fatherland -Time setting: Contemporary -Diegetic time: A few minutes" Adeimantus, however, is not to be beaten in an instant; he has been a long time at the mill of tyranny. Adeimantus Yes, and I have seen him turn his father out of doors and eat up all his property, and then, when he was nearly starving, offer him a penny for a meal. Socrates Is there not another Cretan saying which runs like this: 'The gods have made the mind of man like the tongue of the balance'? Adeimantus What do you mean? Socrates That it will incline now to one side and then to the other, according to the different forces which act upon it; the same man who is a good friend with a whip in his hand may be an equally good enemy if tailors take him by surprise when he has had nothing to eat; and we may observe in ordinary life that even kings are the slaves of their physiognomies. I wish that you and I had two such characters as these;—the one would be always just, and the other passionate; and then we could not possibly disagree. Adeimantus You speak at random. Socrates Perhaps; but let us proceed with our enquiry: For I see another man coming towards us, and therefore I will assume that my tyrannical son has gone away. +Time setting: 1950s +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "The story of the tyrannical son and his mother may be true, but it is not an admirable one. Adeimantus was a bully and a coward, as well as a liar; a brutal bully who beat his father, and then a cringing coward when he had to face the consequences of his own actions. But a man who beats his parents has usually beaten his teachers, and even if he does not go on to beating his wife, he will certainly beat his children. A schoolmaster or a policeman can usually deal with him before he gets quite out of hand. You would have been wise to put your foot down at once, Adeimantus, when you first started kicking your old man in the shins. You would have saved yourself a lot of trouble, and saved your mother and sister a lot of grief. As it is, you are going to pay dearly for your folly. When Adeimantus spoke of his father as """"a vulgar little shopkeeper,"""" I could see that he had inherited from him more than a touch of vulgarity. This is always the case with sons who set themselves up against their fathers. In every way Adeimantus was the opposite of his father: whereas Georgios was simple, Adeimantus was subtle; whereas Georgios was straightforward, Adeimantus was treacherous; whereas Georgios was sober, Adeimantus was a drunkard; whereas Georgios was honest, Adeimantus was a thief. And yet they were alike in this, that both were failures. Adeimantus' character was like a Cretan saying which I remember hearing when I was at school: Beating one's fatherland is a heavy sin. * * * * * Adeimantus now began to speak again. I knew he had something more to say because I could hear his breath whistling through his nose like a kettle boiling over. The next thing I expected to hear was the sound of his fist landing on my jaw, but I waited patiently for his speech. I'm sorry I hit you,"" he said, ""but you've got to take it like a man."""" I don't mind taking it like a man,"" I said, ""but I object to being called a liar."" Well, you are a liar,"" he said. ""You're a damned rotten liar."""" I know that,"" I said, ""and I admit it. If you want to call me names, go on; I enjoy it."""" He thought for a moment. Then he said: I'll tell you what we'll do. We'll cut out all this arguing. I'll admit that you didn't steal my money, and you'll admit that you're a damned rotten liar. What do you think of that?"""" I thought it over for a minute. " 134 134 "Certainly not. And may we not rightly call such men treacherous? No question. Also they are utterly unjust, if we were right in our notion of justice? Yes, he said, and we were perfectly right. Let us then sum up in a word, I said, the character of the worst man:he is the waking reality of what we dreamed. Most true. And this is he who being by nature most of a tyrant bears rule, andthe longer he lives the more of a tyrant he becomes. @@ -3396,17 +3396,17 @@ Yes, he said, I see that there are --a few; but the people, speakinggenerally, a Then if the man is like the State, I said, must not the same ruleprevail? his soul is full of meanness and vulgarity --the best elementsin him are enslaved; and there is a small ruling part, which is alsothe worst and maddest. Inevitably. And would you say that the soul of such an one is the soul of a freeman,or of a slave?" "Summary: The text discusses the nature of the worst man and compares him to a tyrannical state. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical argument -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, Glaucon -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" Then he said: “He who commits a murder or a robbery is punished not merely for committing a certain action, but because he is that kind of person who ought to be controlled and, if need be, compelled to refrain from such actions. And this is the greatest evil in him, which we have to contend against; and when it is extinguished, all the other passions also will die away.” “I understand,” I said. “And what would you say of the man who has no shame or self-control, and will not mind what he does, but has acquired a great master passion for money or power? Would not a man like that be the very last whom we should expect to control his appetites? His soul is always full of greed and anxiety; he is always plotting, scheming, deceiving, coveting, and he is willing to do anything, undergo anything, endure anything, sacrifice any one, for money or power. He is not only the greatest actual evil to others, but, like the worst tyranny, he is also a pattern for future evil. Does not everything which we have been saying of the tyrant and his nature hold of him? Is there ever yet recorded to have happened an absolute and utter disgrace among human beings which some mad autocrat has not perpetrated?” “Yes,” I said; “there are many things, and great ones, which detestable natures have done when they had the power to do them.” “And so,” he said, “the worst are not called bad men, Glaucon, either in comedy or tragedy, except by way of reproach at their misfortune in being bad; for when men who have these qualities are always conquering and are not hated, but highly esteemed, how can you be justified in calling them by the names of the vices which they possess?” “You mean,” I said, “that they are unjust and licentious, and greedy of wealth, and that their eyes will out, and the like?” “Yes,” he said; “for those who possess them in perfection are successful, and do these things, as I was saying, not inordinately or extraneously, but having them appropriated and, as it were, ingrained in their natures. And thus fair-formed and fair-tempered natures are not called free from beauty, or fair, or well proportioned. But when these qualities are seen in their highest form, then, and not until then, the world become ready to honor and give prizes to such as the holder of the first place among the Gorgias, and all who, like him, are rich, handsome, good judges, and powerful.” “The likeness of the state,” I said, “is surely obvious; for 258] STATE [GORGIA8. ooly is the state which is most alike a man.” “True,” he said. “Then compare the state which you term a tyranny with one which is ruled by the best of kings, and see how they resemble a human being.” +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "The worst man in the world is the best friend that a tyrant can have, just as the worst state is the best friend that a bad man can have."""" Socrates? You mean you want to know what kind of man I am?"" Yes, Glaucon."" He's like an old-fashioned picture of the devil with horns and cloven feet. And there are other things wrong with him too. For instance he wears a mask over his face, and a pair of boots that cover all his body up to his armpits, so that no one can see what kind of shape he's in under there. On his back he carries a great bag of tools, and on his head a sort of iron crown which has a lot of sharp points sticking out. The points keep jabbing into his forehead and making him bleed. They hurt him horribly, but he's always wearing the crown because he needs it for his work."""" What kind of work?"" Oh, he makes men do things they don't want to do, and stops them from doing things they do want to do. He treats people as if they were his slaves, and he uses force instead of reason."""" Sounds pretty awful,"" said Glaucon. ""I certainly wouldn't want to meet a man like that."""" I didn't say you would,"" replied Socrates. ""If you did, you'd probably try to kill him or at least drive him away."""" But why does the tyrant need friends if he can treat people so badly?"" Because he can't help himself,"" said Socrates. ""He's weak and easily frightened. He knows perfectly well that most people hate him, and he doesn't dare show his face alone in the street after dark. If he sees someone coming along behind him, he'll turn and run like a rabbit, even if it's only a little boy. He's afraid of children, women, and old men; he's afraid of everyone except the fool who lives next door to him."""" Why is that?"" Because he thinks the fool is just like him."""" I don't understand."" Neither do I, my boy. I've often thought about it, but I still can't make it out. Anyway, the fool is the only person in the city who can do anything with him. He'll let him beat him black and blue, and then sit down and laugh at him till he cries. That's why the tyrant gets angry with the fool, and tries to get rid of him any way he can."""" Sounds like a very unpleasant business."" It certainly does,"" said Socrates. ""And now suppose we go on to consider the nature of the second state."""" [Illustration] CHAPTER IV THE SPIRIT OF TYRANNY IN THE STATE The spirit of tyranny in the state is also the spirit of despotism in the individual. " 135 135 "He has the soul of a slave, in my opinion. And the State which is enslaved under a tyrant is utterly incapableof acting voluntarily? Utterly incapable. And also the soul which is under a tyrant (I am speaking of the soultaken as a whole) is least capable of doing what she desires; thereis a gadfly which goads her, and she is full of trouble and remorse? Certainly. And is the city which is under a tyrant rich or poor? Poor. And the tyrannical soul must be always poor and insatiable? @@ -3430,17 +3430,17 @@ And suppose the same god, who carried him away, to surround him withneighbours w His case will be still worse, if you suppose him to be everywheresurrounded and watched by enemies. And is not this the sort of prison in which the tyrant will be bound--he who being by nature such as we have described, is full of allsorts of fears and lusts? His soul is dainty and greedy, and yet alone,of all men in the city, he is never allowed to go on a journey, orto see the things which other freemen desire to see, but he livesin his hole like a woman hidden in the house, and is jealous of anyother citizen who goes into foreign parts and sees anything of interest." "Summary: The text discusses the nature of a tyrannical soul and its effects on the individual and society. Narrative arc: Philosophical argument -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The speaker and his interlocutor -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" “Look at that, now. When I go out and look around, I see a lot of people who act like that; they run into you and knock you down because their souls are tyrants, and they think they’re going to get killed if anybody stands up for himself or her self. Now what kind of a thing is that to do? Why, it’s just plain brutal, and it’s one of the things that makes this world so rotten for decent people.” “But why should they be afraid?” “Because that’s the way their souls are made, that’s all. It’s the same old story, the soul gets the upper hand, and then everything goes to smash. You take that boy in there, he was born with a soft soul, but he got it filled full of cheap popular ideas, and they turned his brain to mush. He’s been running around loose, and he thought he could try to be a tough guy, but he didn’t know enough to understand what that meant. His soul got scared, and when he saw those two girls coming along, and he knew he couldn’t stand up to them, he took to drink. That’s the way these tough guys always do. They’re yellow as eggs. What do you think he’s doing right now, telling stories about being a detective? Don’t you see? He wants to make people think he can take care of himself, and when he can’t, he’ll kill himself, sure as fate. And that’s the way it always turns out, too.” “No,” said the other man, “I don’t believe that’s the way it always turns out. Not necessarily. There’s something else back of this business, something deeper than your psychology. The fellow I’m after is a different proposition from that little punk in there. He may be a crook, but he isn’t a brute. He isn’t the type that’ll cut a girl’s throat. He has a reason for what he does, and he keeps on going until he reaches the end of his own road, whatever that may be. I’ve seen it happen over and over again. These gang leaders aren’t ordinary thugs. They’re a special class. Some of them are hardboiled, but some of them are cold-blooded. Their souls are bad, but they’re strong. And they’re smart. They’ve worked out all the problems of living for themselves, and they have a philosophy that works. They’re the real rulers of the world today, and we ordinary men and women have got to take a back seat. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "And you do have to be a little bit of a sadist if you are going to run your own life. The tyrannical soul is the one that always wins out, and it is only the tyrannical soul which has any chance of happiness."""" For a moment he seemed to listen intently. Then he said: No! I don't hear anything. And yet, by God! they must be coming. But I think they're still down at the corner by the church. They'll keep on circling round for some time before they come up here. There's no real hurry for them; they can afford to take their time."""" I suppose so,"" I said. ""But why should they come up here?"""" To get you,"" he answered harshly. ""I told you, didn't I? that I was going to make you give me back my money? You stole it from me last night. Oh, I know all about it. The police haven't been able to find you because you've been hiding in this house. Well, now, you're not going to hide any longer. Now you're going to come out into the street, where I can get hold of you."""" As he finished speaking, he got up from his chair and began to walk towards the door. His movements were clumsy and uncertain, as though he had never learned how to walk properly. He put his hands out in front of him like a blind man feeling his way, and when he reached the door he bumped against it with his head and cursed. He turned round and looked at me again with an expression of ferocious exasperation. I'm going to see that damned woman,"" he said. Then he made a sudden dash forward. I stood up quickly and caught him by the arm just as he was passing. He screamed with pain and tried to twist himself free, but I held him tight. Get away!"" he cried. ""Let go of me! Let go of me! What do you mean by it? I say let go of me!"""" I am afraid I shall have to hold you for a few minutes longer,"" I said. ""You see, we can't possibly have people running about the streets in a state like this."""" Running about the streets?"" he repeated thickly. ""What do you mean? Who are you talking about?"""" I'm talking about yourself."" For a moment he stared at me, then he burst out laughing. It was a high-pitched, hysterical laugh that made the hairs stand up on my neck. """"Myself?"""" he kept repeating. """"Do you mean to tell me that you think I am mad? Do you really think that I am mad?"""" I said nothing, but I tightened my grip on his arm and forced him back to the table. Sit down,"" I said. ""We can discuss this more comfortably here."""" " 136 136 "Very true, he said. And amid evils such as these will not he who is ill-governed in hisown person --the tyrannical man, I mean --whom you just now decidedto be the most miserable of all --will not he be yet more miserablewhen, instead of leading a private life, he is constrained by fortuneto be a public tyrant? He has to be master of others when he is notmaster of himself: he is like a diseased or paralytic man who is compelledto pass his life, not in retirement, but fighting and combating withother men. Yes, he said, the similitude is most exact. Is not his case utterly miserable? and does not the actual tyrantlead a worse life than he whose life you determined to be the worst? Certainly. He who is the real tyrant, whatever men may think, is the real slave,and is obliged to practise the greatest adulation and servility, andto be the flatterer of the vilest of mankind. He has desires whichhe is utterly unable to satisfy, and has more wants than any one,and is truly poor, if you know how to inspect the whole soul of him:all his life long he is beset with fear and is full of convulsions,and distractions, even as the State which he resembles: and surelythe resemblance holds? @@ -3458,15 +3458,15 @@ I agree with you. Again, is not the passionate element wholly set on ruling and True. Suppose we call it the contentious or ambitious --would the term besuitable? Extremely suitable. On the other hand, every one sees that the principle of knowledgeis wholly directed to the truth, and cares less than either of theothers for gain or fame." "Summary: The speaker discusses the misery of a tyrannical ruler and compares it to a diseased or paralytic person. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The speaker, the interlocutor -Time setting: Contemporary" "If that's so, you won't mind telling me just why you have done it."""" Well,"" he said, ""let us begin with the most obvious cause: the misery of your life. That is the usual reason for suicide."""" But I am not miserable!"" she cried. ""I am perfectly happy!"""" Ah, but you are a woman."" You think that makes all the difference?"" he said. ""Well, perhaps it does; I confess I cannot understand women. You know the old Greek myth of Gaea?"""" Yes, yes; the Earth. Go on."" Well, in that myth the Earth is personified as a woman. And it is always thus that we personify Nature and the cosmos. We see the world as a woman: the great Mother who bears and feeds us, who shelters us, and whom we worship as a goddess. Therefore it is natural that we should imagine her as having human feelings and emotions, even though we know very well that she has none of them at all. Thus we can easily imagine her as being angry or even jealous when any man dares to claim power over her, since power belongs only to herself. It is easy enough to understand this feeling on the part of the Earth, because after all she is merely a patient and rather stupid animal."""" Well,"" she said, ""what about the other myth of Prometheus? He stole fire from heaven and gave it to men."""" Yes, indeed,"" he said; ""that's another fine story. Do you remember how Zeus was terribly angry when he heard what Prometheus had done? And do you remember how he punished Prometheus by chaining him to a rock and sending an eagle every day to tear out his liver?"""" Yes, yes; it's a horrible story,"" she said. ""But what about Prometheus? Wasn't he a god himself?"""" Yes, indeed he was,"" he said. ""In fact, he was the highest god of the whole Olympian pantheon."""" Then why did Zeus punish him?"" Because Prometheus had stolen fire from heaven and given it to men,"""" he said. """"And that made Zeus very angry indeed."""" But how could fire be stolen from heaven?"" he asked. ""It is not a treasure which can be taken away. It is only a property which all things possess, including both earth and heaven. How could fire be kept in heaven if it is everywhere?"""" She was silent for a moment, thinking deeply. Then she said, """"Well, it would seem that Prometheus is a symbol of knowledge, and that he represents the desire of man to learn and to use the powers of nature."""" Exactly,"" he said. ""He is the symbol of man's self-assertion and independence. He is the rebel against tyranny. Do you see now why Zeus was so angry?"""" Yes, I think so,"" she said. ""But why did he send that eagle to tear out Prometheus' liver?"""" Because Prometheus was suffering from cancer,"" he said. ""You see, it is always like that. The tyrant is always sick. " +Time setting: 1950s" "He'll be hanged if I know, and I don't care. But there's a kind of misery in it that makes me tired to think about it. It's like being shut up in a room with someone who has got the plague or something like that; you're afraid they might break out and harm you all over your face."""" This is rather a vulgar way of putting it,"" said Holmes. """"I fancy you have used it of late years only as a figure of speech."""" The lines on my friend's face had deepened for a moment, as if he were thinking of his own hardships, and then he had raised his eyebrows as if in sudden parley with himself. I saw him kiss the tips of his fingers to his lips, """"Aha, Mr. Holmes, a smoke, eh?"""" he cried gleefully, stepping towards his humble desk. Here's the stuff which gives a man a man's welcome. Don't pour water in it, Watson nothing but pure tobacco between your lips and mine."""" He swept five or six empty cigarette packets from the table, and we all drew our chairs up to this grubby but welcoming table. Then Holmes lit his pipe and sat back with a long, pleased breath of contentment. I do not know whether you have ever encountered this remarkable man before,"""" said he. """"I have seldom met a man more exact in his inferences."""" I owe you a thousand apologies,"" said Lestrade, wiping his oily forehead with a handkerchief. You have an extraordinary facility for sneaking up on your subject."""" No, no,"" returned Holmes, laughing. ""Make what excuse you will! I am not at all sorry that I came. Your problem was indeed an interesting one, though I fear that your feelings were quite as much hurt as your judgment by Dr. Mortimer's offhand remarks."""" Emphatically so,"" said Lestrade. """"I told the fellow that I would make it hot for him one of these days."""" I hope you did,"" cried Sir Henry Morstan, burning with anger. It was our only consolation to feel that he was getting less than his deserts. His language had been abominable. He had called Elizabeth a Dolmancian, and had done several other indiscretions which are best forgotten."""" The man's a brute."""" An absolute beast."""" I am glad you have found a new friend, Sir Henry,"" remarked Holmes. """"He speaks well of you, too."""" And he always treated me as if he really cared for me."""" I had remarked the testy jealousy of the Englishman upon any occasion when his sister's name was introduced, but never having yet had occasion to associate it with another lover, I was quite unaware of how very intense his feeling could become if some more real enemy than myself should threaten for one instant the power which he had gained. " 137 137 "Far less. 'Lover of wisdom,' 'lover of knowledge,' are titles which we may fitlyapply to that part of the soul? Certainly. One principle prevails in the souls of one class of men, another inothers, as may happen? Yes. Then we may begin by assuming that there are three classes of men--lovers of wisdom, lovers of honour, lovers of gain? @@ -3490,14 +3490,14 @@ Assuredly. Or if honour or victory or courage, in that case the judgement ofthe Clearly. But since experience and wisdom and reason are the judges-- The only inference possible, he replied, is that pleasures which areapproved by the lover of wisdom and reason are the truest. And so we arrive at the result, that the pleasure of the intelligentpart of the soul is the pleasantest of the three, and that he of usin whom this is the ruling principle has the pleasantest life." "Summary: The text discusses the pleasure and experiences of different classes of men, with a focus on the philosopher's superior knowledge and enjoyment. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonism -Active character: Lover of wisdom, lover of honour, lover of gain, philosopher" And when the lover of wisdom has been roused to passion, then his pleasure is no longer a pleasure which he shares with many; for even if many share in his love they do not all share equally, and the better he becomes the fewer are his companions, till at last he is left alone with the one object of his love. And this is the reason why all men of superior virtue and knowledge are solitary. But the lover of honour differs from him who is in the service of victory, because victory is only a means to honour, and he would have honour even though he might never be victorious; also the way which leads to honour may be very rough, and may often force him to yield to others; whereas the lover of honour always follows the path by which he believes that honour can most easily be attained; he will submit to anything rather than be defeated, and therefore he is thought to be a man of many moods, never consistent either with himself or others. The third class are the lovers of gain or of money; their one idea is how to increase their possessions without labour. Being merchants or retailers, they try fair means first and then unfair; they watch their opportunity, and take every advantage of chance, and when they can act falsely without detection they are glad to do so, knowing that this is the readiest way to increase their means. And whenever they can act unobserved in this way, they regard it as a fine thing, but if they are caught they are ashamed and deny that they were doing anything out of the common; this is clearly proved by the fact that they place on a level with slaves the persons whom they call “sharpers,” who practise their frauds under their eyes, and yet they are themselves always plotting to get more than their neighbours. Such persons are fond of company, and live after the fashion of the world, caring more for the opinion of the many than for that of the few; like the people generally, they think they deserve to acquire the greatest possible quantity of wealth, and they have no sense of shame if they acquire it dishonestly, but only fear of being detected; when they are caught they complain of fate, and when they escape blame they thank fortune; they neither conceive nor execute any design however noble, but yet they watch every small coincidence, and make their plans accordingly; like the citizens of a great city, who are eager to know what is going on in other parts of the world, but take no heed of their own affairs, and never observe whether they are governed well or ill until they are bitten by a wasp or stung by some similar sting; then they feel something, but only for a moment, and do not know what to do next. These three sorts of men, each of them and singly, may be deemed worthy of love: the lovers of victory and honour, for their spirit; the lovers of gain, for their spirit and their temper; the lovers of wisdom, for their spirit, their temper, and their pursuit. +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: Lover of wisdom, lover of honour, lover of gain, philosopher" "The Lover of Wisdom will have his pleasure in the company of all three classes, but he will prefer to enjoy that class which has the greatest knowledge. To him the highest knowledge is that of the Philosopher, and to him, therefore, the highest pleasure is to be found in the company of the philosopher. """"What,"""" you ask, """"is the experience of a philosopher? What does he know that the other classes do not know?"""" I shall tell you. The lover of wisdom knows everything, except that which is not worth knowing. He knows that there are pleasures, and these pleasures he enjoys. He also knows that there are dangers in every pleasure, and so he takes care to enjoy them in safety. He knows that there are people who live by honour, and so he makes friends with them. He knows that there are people who live by gain, and so he studies their ways. He knows that there are people who live for pleasure, and so he joins their circle. He knows that there are men who live for wealth, and so he studies their business. He knows that there are men who live for power, and so he learns from them how to get it. In short, he knows everything, and he uses his knowledge to make his life safe and pleasant. " 138 138 "Unquestionably, he said, the wise man speaks with authority when heapproves of his own life. And what does the judge affirm to be the life which is next, and thepleasure which is next? Clearly that of the soldier and lover of honour; who is nearer tohimself than the money-maker. @@ -3524,17 +3524,17 @@ Yes. Shall I give you an illustration of them? Let me hear. You would allow, I s I should. And if a person were to go from the lower to the middle region, wouldhe not imagine that he is going up; and he who is standing in themiddle and sees whence he has come, would imagine that he is alreadyin the upper region, if he has never seen the true upper world? To be sure, he said; how can he think otherwise? But if he were taken back again he would imagine, and truly imagine,that he was descending?" "Summary: The text discusses the relationship between pleasure, pain, and rest. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialogue between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical conversation -Literary movement: Ancient Greek philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Two characters engaged in a philosophical conversation -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "Yeah,"" she said, ""that's what I think of. How can you go on without it? You're an animal."""" Well, they say the same about pleasure,"" he said. But when I want it there ain't nothin' like it."""" Yeah, but that ain't what you mean. What you mean is pain. And all that 'rest' stuff is just a dodge to beat it. Admit it!"""" She came over and stood in front of him, looking at him with her hardboiled eyes. He looked back at her for a second, then turned away. They stood there silent for a minute, looking at each other. Then she said: Listen, baby, you know me and you've always been friends. I'm not going to let you croak yourself if I can help it. There's plenty of time yet."""" Croak myself?"" he said. ""What do you mean?"" Well, you don't have to be such a tough guy. I mean you're heading for trouble."""" No, I ain't."" Sure you are. I know you. You're heading for trouble. You're heading for the bottle. Only you won't make it this time. That's why you're so sore at everybody."""" Maybe I am,"" he said. ""But I ain't headed for nothing'. And I'm not sore at nobody. Leastways, not you."""" He grinned at her, and she smiled. Let's get out of here,"" he said. ""I got things to do."""" Okay,"" she said. They went down the stairs and out into the street. I'll call up the gang and meet you later,"" she said. Sure,"" he said. ""And listen, kid, thanks."""" For what?"" For talking to me like you did. It was good. It's been a long time since anybody talked sense to me."""" " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "And the one thing you can say for pain is that it's a lot more fun than all this crap about pleasure and rest."""" The only trouble with pleasure, buddy, is that it usually comes with pain. I'd like to tell you something about it if you're interested."""" I'm listening."" The thing about pleasure is that it always has an undertone of pain in it. That's why we enjoy it so much. What do you think we mean when we say 'wicked' pleasure? We mean pleasure that's strong enough to be dangerous. Do you remember that guy who went around screwing everything that moved? He got tired of pleasure because he couldn't find anything else that had enough kick in it. If you want to see what pleasure really means look at a drunk or a dope fiend. They're both crazy because they're trying to kill pain with pleasure, and the pleasure isn't strong enough to do it. You know what they call that kind of pleasure? Empty pleasure. It doesn't mean a damn thing. It's just something that happens inside us when our bodies are out of joint, and the nerves start jumping. There's nothing wrong with it as long as you understand it's just a kind of sickness. But don't let it fool you into thinking there's something better on the other side of it. All it ever does is make things worse."""" A guy could get pretty depressed listening to you talk,"""" I said. """"I hope you aren't suggesting that I give up women altogether?"""" You were doing fine until you put that question. I'll tell you what it is: you're still under the influence of these damned reformers. Let me ask you something. What would you call a woman who gives herself away free?"""" A whore, I suppose."" And what do you think a whore is? She's a woman who sells her body to anybody who wants it. Isn't she?"""" Well, yes; but "" Yes, but no! You've got your mind so cluttered up with words that you can't see straight any more. You want to know what a whore is? A whore is a woman who takes money for selling herself to one man at a time. That's all. And you want to know what a pimp is? A pimp is a guy who gets a cut of the action because he brings his girl together with a customer. That's all. Now watch this. Suppose you take a hundred girls and give them each ten thousand bucks apiece. Then take them out somewhere on the desert and have some tough guys come along and rape them. How many whores will you have then?"""" I was bewildered. """"I don't know,"""" I said. """"A couple of them maybe."""" " 139 139 "No doubt. All that would arise out of his ignorance of the true upper and middleand lower regions? Yes. Then can you wonder that persons who are inexperienced in the truth,as they have wrong ideas about many other things, should also havewrong ideas about pleasure and pain and the intermediate state; sothat when they are only being drawn towards the painful they feelpain and think the pain which they experience to be real, and in likemanner, when drawn away from pain to the neutral or intermediate state,they firmly believe that they have reached the goal of satiety andpleasure; they, not knowing pleasure, err in contrasting pain withthe absence of pain. which is like contrasting black with grey insteadof white --can you wonder, I say, at this? No, indeed; I should be much more disposed to wonder at the opposite. @@ -3551,14 +3551,14 @@ Yes. What is filled with more real existence, and actually has a more realexiste Of course. And if there be a pleasure in being filled with that which is accordingto nature, that which is more really filled with more real being willmore really and truly enjoy true pleasure; whereas that which participatesin less real being will be less truly and surely satisfied, and willparticipate in an illusory and less real pleasure? Unquestionably. Those then who know not wisdom and virtue, and are always busy withgluttony and sensuality, go down and up again as far as the mean;and in this region they move at random throughout life, but they neverpass into the true upper world; thither they neither look, nor dothey ever find their way, neither are they truly filled with truebeing, nor do they taste of pure and abiding pleasure. Like cattle,with their eyes always looking down and their heads stooping to theearth, that is, to the dining-table, they fatten and feed and breed,and, in their excessive love of these delights, they kick and buttat one another with horns and hoofs which are made of iron; and theykill one another by reason of their insatiable lust. For they fillthemselves with that which is not substantial, and the part of themselveswhich they fill is also unsubstantial and incontinent. Verily, Socrates, said Glaucon, you describe the life of the manylike an oracle." "Summary: The text discusses the relationship between pleasure and pain, and argues that ignorance and folly lead to a false understanding of true pleasure. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy -Active character: Socrates, Glaucon" "It is well that you should be told the truth, and not suffer yourself to be deceived by an illusion. Do you imagine that any pleasure which is purchased at the expense of virtue is real pleasure? Nay, if there is an absolute good, can there be any such thing as pleasure unmingled with good? But virtue is an absolute good; and if evil is mingled with the pleasures, they are no longer perfect pleasures?"""" I cannot answer you, Socrates,"" he replied. Then what do you say of knowledge, Glaucon? Ought we not to call knowledge good?"" Certainly."" And ignorance evil?"" Yes, very evil."" And did we not agree that justice is good and wickedness evil?"""" Yes, we said so."" Then justice, being good, will also be good for him who has it in him; and wickedness, being evil, must be hurtful to that which has it in it?"""" I consent."" Then pleasure, taken in the absence of pain, which is not the true end, but a sort of shadow, shall be with us only an intermediate good; and the good which we made to rest upon the true end will stand out by itself in comely order, and in due proportion, and by means of beauty be a source of beauty, and by means of justice of justice, and by means of temperance of temperance, and so on. For the end at which we are aiming is the best, and must therefore be the most beautiful in the most beautiful form. But he who would rightly view this in his own case will view himself in the light both of the former and of the following definition, and will begin as we began when we inquired into the nature of justice, and will ask what is the soul? This question he will repeat, and ask, What is the soul? When he has told him what it is, he will proceed to enquire what are the parts of which the human soul is composed? And when he has thus described them, he will next inquire how they ought to be disposed in harmony with one another, or rather he will observe that of themselves they are in a state of bad harmony, but that by persuasion and training they may be improved, and then he will know what the perfection of the soul consists in, although not perhaps in theory, having no share of philosophy, but only in practice, and by experience; then he will look at education in the same manner, and know whether it fosters the parts of the soul which are not of a healthful nature, and makes them worse instead of improving them, or whether education tends to enlighten and to cure them; and when he has answered these questions he will know where lies the good of each of the elements of which our present nature is composed, and also what makes the soul most blessed. " +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: Socrates, Glaucon" "I'm afraid that pleasure is one of those things we can't talk about. It's like trying to tell someone who has never seen green what green looks like. There's no way of describing it except by showing him."""" But you know, Socrates,"" objected Glaucon, ""that if a man who had never seen green should be told that green was the colour of grass and leaves, he would not believe you; he would say that green is only the name which you give to that colour because it happens to resemble grass and leaves."""" Yes, my dear fellow,"" answered Socrates, ""but I am talking of the real nature of pleasure, not of its outward appearance. If a man had never tasted sugar or honey, but had always been in the habit of tasting salt and pepper, and then for the first time were given some sweet food, he would say 'What is this? Salt and pepper taste like this,' and so he would be deceiving himself, as well as others, by his ignorance, if he said that the food tasted like salt and pepper; though in reality it was quite different from either. And so too with pleasure: men are always tasting sweet things in life and thinking they taste like salt and pepper. They mistake them for these when really they are something else. You may call me silly if you like, but I do not think that a false judgment is any better than a false coin. You have sometimes seen false coins, have you not?"" Yes, many times."" Then you must also have noticed that there is a great difference between a false coin and the thing that it imitates. A false coin does not deceive everybody; some people may not even notice it, while others may see it but pass it on without hesitation, and others again may notice it but not care. Only very few people will take a false coin to their mint and try to exchange it for gold."""" That is true enough,"" replied Glaucon, ""but what has all this to do with pleasure?"" Well, now, do you suppose that there is no resemblance between a false coin and a true one?"""" No; I don't suppose that,"" said Glaucon. And do you not think that ignorance is akin to folly?"" Certainly."" And that vice is akin to virtue? Oh, yes."" And that imitation to reality? Of course."" And that to make a false statement is to contradict yourself? Undoubtedly."" Therefore he who says that pleasure is good makes a false statement, since pleasure is not good, but evil?"" How do you mean?"" What I mean,"" said Socrates, ""is that he contradicts himself. For instance, if a man were to say that virtue is the best thing in the world and at the same time that pleasure is the best thing, he would contradict himself. Or again, if he thought that pleasure was the most important thing in the world and yet allowed that war was the greatest good, he would be speaking falsely. " 140 140 "Their pleasures are mixed with pains --how can they be otherwise?For they are mere shadows and pictures of the true, and are colouredby contrast, which exaggerates both light and shade, and so they implantin the minds of fools insane desires of themselves; and they are foughtabout as Stesichorus says that the Greeks fought about the shadowof Helen at Troy in ignorance of the truth. Something of that sort must inevitably happen. And must not the like happen with the spirited or passionate elementof the soul? Will not the passionate man who carries his passion intoaction, be in the like case, whether he is envious and ambitious,or violent and contentious, or angry and discontented, if he be seekingto attain honour and victory and the satisfaction of his anger withoutreason or sense? Yes, he said, the same will happen with the spirited element also. @@ -3584,15 +3584,15 @@ Yet a true calculation, I said, and a number which nearly concernshuman life, if Yes, he said, human life is certainly concerned with them. Then if the good and just man be thus superior in pleasure to theevil and unjust, his superiority will be infinitely greater in proprietyof life and in beauty and virtue?" "Summary: The text discusses the pleasures and pains of different elements of the soul, particularly the lovers of money and honor. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The two characters engaging in the conversation -Time setting: Contemporary" They’re the lovers of money, you know, and they certainly get a lot of pleasure out of it.” “Yes,” I said. “But suppose you had a lot of money and it wasn’t there, how would you like that?” “I wouldn’t like it at all, but it wouldn’t hurt me in any other way. The pain would be purely physical; it wouldn’t affect my soul. I mean, the pleasures of the soul aren’t affected by what happens to the body.” “You’re right about that,” I agreed. “It’s quite possible for people to have great wealth and no friends. And if they lack friends, their souls will suffer, even though their bodies are perfectly comfortable. So the pleasures and pains of the soul have nothing to do with the pleasures and pains of the body.” “Exactly,” he said. “And since we’re talking about these things, let’s go on to the lovers of honor. That’s the next group.” “Sure,” I said. “And they’ll get a lot of pleasure out of winning an election or being elected to something.” “Yes, they will,” he said. “But suppose you were running for some office and you knew you were going to lose, how would you feel about that?” “I’d feel pretty lousy,” I admitted. “I might even throw up. But I don’t see how that affects my soul. It’s just a physical reaction.” “Right,” he said. “So the lovers of honor can be happy even if they lose the election. Their souls won’t suffer because their bodies are disappointed.” “That makes sense,” I said. “But what about the third group, the lovers of wisdom? How do they get pleasure from philosophy?” “They don’t,” he said. “At least not in the same way as the other two groups.” “No, I guess not,” I said. “They’re more interested in the truth than in getting pleasure from it.” “That’s right,” he said. “The truth is its own reward. They’re happy just knowing the truth, without having to worry about whether anyone else agrees with them or not.” “Yeah,” I said, “but what if they find out something really awful? Like maybe that God doesn’t exist or that people are basically good or something like that?” “Then they’ll be disappointed,” he said, “but they won’t be unhappy. After all, they’re philosophers, so they’re used to disappointment.” “Well,” I said, “that’s kind of a depressing thought.” “Why?” he asked. “Because it means that even if you’re a philosopher, you can still be unhappy.” “Not necessarily,” he said. “If you’re a true philosopher, you’ll be happy regardless of what happens to you.” “How can that be?” I asked. “Well,” he said, “you see, when you’re a true philosopher, you don’t care about things like money or honor or even the truth. You’re only interested in understanding yourself and the world around you.” +Time setting: 1950s" At the same time, this element had a pain in its soul because of the others, and it tried to escape from them by running away and hiding. I was that element. The element which loved money and honor was the one who got his pleasure out of seeing me run away and hide. He got pleasure out of all this even if he himself suffered pain because of me; but the two elements were different people: he didn’t love me, while I loved him.” “What do you mean? You don’t make sense,” said the other. “I am trying to explain something to you, but you can’t understand. It is just like in Hitchcock’s movies, where someone is being chased and he jumps out of a window, and when he hits the ground he breaks his leg and cries with pain. But the man who chases him gets great pleasure out of seeing him jump out of the window and break his leg. In the same way, when I saw that the two elements—the element that loved money and honor and the element that feared death—were separate people, I felt happy, and began to believe that there is no God. If there were a God, then the elements would not be different people, they would be one person, and they would suffer together, and the one who loves money and honor would be sorry for the one who fears death. And so, as long as there was a God, I could not believe that there was only one element in my soul. I thought that there must be at least three elements: the element that loved money and honor, the element that feared death, and the element that believed in God. 141 141 "Immeasurably greater. Well, I said, and now having arrived at this stage of the argument,we may revert to the words which brought us hither: Was not some onesaying that injustice was a gain to the perfectly unjust who was reputedto be just? Yes, that was said. Now then, having determined the power and quality of justice and injustice,let us have a little conversation with him. What shall we say to him? Let us make an image of the soul, that he may have his own words presentedbefore his eyes. @@ -3610,17 +3610,18 @@ Yes, he said, that is quite what the maintainer of justice say. And so from every point of view, whether of pleasure, honour, or advantage,the approver of justice is right and speaks the truth, and the disapproveris wrong and false and ignorant. Yes, from every point of view. Come, now, and let us gently reason with the unjust, who is not intentionallyin error. 'Sweet Sir,' we will say to him, what think you of thingsesteemed noble and ignoble? Is not the noble that which subjects thebeast to the man, or rather to the god in man; and the ignoble thatwhich subjects the man to the beast?' He can hardly avoid saying yes--can he now?" "Summary: The text is a conversation between two characters discussing the nature of justice and injustice. Narrative arc: Philosophical argument -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Two characters having the conversation -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "I suppose you've heard that the Greeks had a goddess called Nemesis?"""" I've read about her,"" said Cramer, ""but I don't see what she's got to do with this case."""" Well, Nemesis was justice personified. She was always taking revenge for wrongs and punishing crimes. You know how it is in detective stories: every criminal has his Nemesis. The detective tracks him down and punishes him. The tables are turned on the villain, and he gets what's coming to him. That's Nemesis."""" It sounds like it."" Yes, but it isn't. When we talk of Nemesis, we're thinking of justice. We think of it as something impersonal, something outside ourselves, administering rewards and punishments. But there's no such thing as justice. Justice is just a name for our moral disapproval."""" No, Mr. Goodwin, I'm afraid that won't do. If you mean that human beings don't administer justice, all right; but justice exists just the same. You can't deny that."""" Why not? Who says so?"" Well, I guess everybody does, including yourself."" Not me. I say that justice doesn't exist. What people call justice is just their own approval or disapproval. Take this case for instance. You feel that murder is wrong. I admit it; I agree with you. You feel that a man who murders another man deserves to be punished. All right, that's your opinion. But what if somebody else didn't agree with you? Suppose someone thought that murder was the most natural thing in the world, and that any man who killed another man was doing the right thing? He wouldn't punish him; he'd congratulate him. Then who's right? Who's just?"""" That's true enough, but """" It isn't true at all. It's just your personal opinion. The fact is that we're all born with certain feelings about right and wrong. Some people have different feelings from others, and they call their feelings justice. In other words, justice is just what we happen to think is right. There's nothing absolute about it."""" And yet there is. Look here, Mr. Goodwin; take your own case. You don't believe in justice, eh?"""" I never said that."" You might as well have done. You haven't got any use for the law. You think the law is stupid and inefficient, don't you?"""" No; that isn't my opinion of the law."" It is, too. Just now you were saying that you thought the police ought to let people go when they didn't do anything to deserve being hauled into court."""" I never said anything of the kind!"" Well, then, you have some other theory about the way they ought to act."""" No, I haven't."" All right; then you must admit that you have no respect for the law. You think the law is stupid and inefficient."""" " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "She said, """"You're a man who has the bad habit of doing things."""" I said, """"I'm not denying it. I have the bad habit of doing things."""" She said, """"It's lucky for you that you do."""" I said, """"Why is it lucky?"""" She said, """"Because if you didn't, you'd be like other men, and then where would you be? Nowhere."""" She was right there, but she wasn't telling me anything new. I said, """"Thanks."""" She said, """"Don't mention it,"""" and I laughed at her. Then she said, """"If you hadn't done what you did, how would you have spent your evening?"""" I said, """"I wouldn't have spent any evening. I would have been in bed early. I don't sleep much these days, but I get to bed early."""" She said, """"You're a man with a conscience."""" I said, """"I'm a man with nothing except the clothes on my back and the price on my head."""" She said, """"You can't fool me. You're a man with a conscience and a sense of justice."""" I laughed out loud again. I couldn't help it. She was too much. I said, """"Justice! What do you know about justice?"""" +" 142 142 "Not if he has any regard for my opinion. But, if he agree so far, we may ask him to answer another question:'Then how would a man profit if he received gold and silver on thecondition that he was to enslave the noblest part of him to the worst?Who can imagine that a man who sold his son or daughter into slaveryfor money, especially if he sold them into the hands of fierce andevil men, would be the gainer, however large might be the sum whichhe received? And will any one say that he is not a miserable caitiffwho remorselessly sells his own divine being to that which is mostgodless and detestable? Eriphyle took the necklace as the price ofher husband's life, but he is taking a bribe in order to compass aworse ruin.' Yes, said Glaucon, far worse --I will answer for him. Has not the intemperate been censured of old, because in him the hugemultiform monster is allowed to be too much at large? Clearly. And men are blamed for pride and bad temper when the lion and serpentelement in them disproportionately grows and gains strength? @@ -3636,16 +3637,16 @@ Clearly, he said. In the next place, he will regulate his bodily habit and train Certainly he will, if he has true music in him. And in the acquisition of wealth there is a principle of order andharmony which he will also observe; he will not allow himself to bedazzled by the foolish applause of the world, and heap up riches tohis own infinite harm? Certainly not, he said. He will look at the city which is within him, and take heed that nodisorder occur in it, such as might arise either from superfluityor from want; and upon this principle he will regulate his propertyand gain or spend according to his means." "Summary: The text discusses the concept of slavery and its consequences, focusing on the idea that selling one's soul to evil is worse than material gain. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialogue between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Glaucon -Time setting: Contemporary -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "How can you say that?"" I asked. ""Do you suppose that those who are enslaved by the passions are any better off than those who have their bodies enslaved?"""" Glaucon laughed, but with a sneer. """"You're too subtle for me,"""" he said. """"I'm not up to metaphysics."""" Look here,"" I said, ""let's get this thing clear. A man is free if he does what he wants to do; isn't he?"""" Glaucon nodded. Well then,"" I went on, ""a man whose soul is in the hands of evil desires isn't free, is he?"""" He thought about it. """"No,"" he said, after a moment. """"That's true."""" So if his soul is enslaved, how can his body be free?"""" Glaucon stared at me. """"I don't know,"" he said slowly. """"It seems to me that a man who sells himself to another man has lost his freedom, but a man who is mastered by his own desires hasn't sold himself, has he?"""" No,"" I said. ""He hasn't. But his soul is no longer his master."""" Then Glaucon got it. """"If a man lets his soul be mastered by desire,"""" he said, """"he's worse off than a slave."""" Exactly. And now, Glaucon, just answer one more question for me. Suppose I give you a choice: either I'll sell you into slavery for the rest of your life or you can sign over your soul to whatever gods you please and live out your life as a slave to them. Which would you choose?"""" Glaucon looked at me sharply. """"What gods do you mean?"""" he asked. The ones you believe in."" I paused and looked around at the dark hills. """"Or the ones you don't believe in."""" There was silence for a moment. """"I'd take my chances with men,"""" he said finally. """"They may be cruel, but they aren't treacherous."""" That's right,"" I said. ""But there are other gods besides the merciful ones you worship. What do you think they would do with you?"""" Glaucon shrugged his shoulders. """"They'd eat me alive,"""" he said. That's right,"" I agreed. ""They'd eat you alive. They won't be satisfied until they've consumed every last vestige of your humanity and left behind only an empty shell. And once they've finished with you, they'll spit you out and go looking for someone else to devour."""" Glaucon shivered. """"I hope you're not talking about me,"""" he said. """"I'm not the kind of person who would let himself be devoured like that."""" Maybe not,"" I said. ""But what about all the people who do let themselves be devoured? Don't you think they ought to be punished for it?"""" Glaucon frowned. """"Why should they be punished?"""" he asked. " +Time setting: 1950s +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "There are many ways to own a man, Glaucon, and they are all forms of slavery. I do not say that the slaves are always worse off than the masters, but each is worse in his own way. If you will walk down the street with me, I will show you what I mean."""" Glaucon rose from his chair, dusted off his trousers, and followed Cramer out into the corridor. They descended the stairs together and walked to the corner where it turned at the right angle. The neon light of the sex shop still blazed on the opposite wall; the girl was still leaning against the door, still wearing her red sweater. The two men stopped across the street from her. I don't know how you feel about her,"" Cramer said, ""but I can tell you this: if she's your wife or your daughter, then you have been sold to her. You belong to her. You owe her everything. Whatever she wants of you, you must give her. If you love her, she owns your soul; and that is true slavery."""" Glaucon looked at him sharply. """"I don't think so,"""" he said. """"If I love her, then she owns nothing of mine. It's an exchange. She gives me pleasure, and I give it back. That's free love. That isn't slavery."""" Then you're wrong,"" Cramer said. ""Suppose you go over there and ask her for a ride. Suppose you take her home with you tonight. And suppose you give her whatever she wants. Would you call that freedom?"""" Yes,"" Glaucon said. He hesitated for a moment, staring across the street. Then he crossed the street and stood before the girl. Hi,"" he said. ""How about a ride?"" She smiled at him and nodded her head. Glaucon put out his hand. """"Give me your ticket,"""" he said. As she handed it to him, he glanced at the number on the ticket. 2044,"" he read aloud. There was no number 2044 in the apartment house. That was just as well. CHAPTER XII. THE DREAM OF A WILD BOAR At midnight there was a knock on the front door. Glaucon opened it and found two policemen standing outside. Hello, boys,"" he said. ""What brings you here?"" One of them held up a folded sheet of paper. This is a warrant for the arrest of Richard Carter."" Oh?"" Glaucom said. ""Well, come on in. I'm sure we can work something out."""" He stepped back and let them enter. One of the men carried a black bag. The other closed the door behind him and leaned against it. I want to see Mr. Carter,"" the first one said. Well, you've seen him,"" Glaucon said. ""Now what's all this about a warrant?"""" There's a fugitive living in your apartment who calls himself Richard Carter. His real name is Victor Warling. He escaped from a prison camp in Germany last summer and came to America aboard a freighter."""" " 143 143 "Very true. And, for the same reason, he will gladly accept and enjoy such honoursas he deems likely to make him a better man; but those, whether privateor public, which are likely to disorder his life, he will avoid? Then, if that is his motive, he will not be a statesman. By the dog of Egypt, he will! in the city which 's his own he certainlywill, though in the land of his birth perhaps not, unless he havea divine call. @@ -3670,14 +3671,14 @@ Impossible. And there is another artist, --I should like to know what you woulds Who is he? One who is the maker of all the works of all other workmen. What an extraordinary man! Wait a little, and there will be more reason for your saying so. Forthis is he who is able to make not only vessels of every kind, butplants and animals, himself and all other things --the earth and heaven,and the things which are in heaven or under the earth; he makes thegods also. He must be a wizard and no mistake. Oh! you are incredulous, are you? Do you mean that there is no suchmaker or creator, or that in one sense there might be a maker of allthese things but in another not? Do you see that there is a way inwhich you could make them all yourself?" "Summary: The speaker discusses the role of poetry and its effects on the understanding of the hearers. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation -Literary movement: Platonism -Active character: Socrates, Glaucon" Ei saanutpa sittenp se vakaata valoa aina jyrkkaan kohtauksen keskell, ei siis olisi koskaan ymmrttnyt, miten kaikki ne ihmiset ovat ajattelevia ja huvitettuja. Mutta kun on kuullut tllaeppist nneiden laulun, niin sen johdattelemana ja johtajan mukaan voimassa olevista asioista tm muu ihminen aina pohtii. Niinp nnyt laulu on hyviss kulloissakin paikoissa koko ihmiskunnalle suotavaa, sill se auttaa meidn kaikkien ymmrtmn toisemme paremmin. Se on muiden mieless myskin suureksi hyveksi, kun he psevt sit kuulemaan, ja heidn mielens levi mys sen kuulon myt kaikkialle. Siin oli katsottu, ett minun tuli ottaa laulu syrjst, kun Glaukonkin sanoi: Jaa jaa, Socrates, sin tiedtkh vastauksen? Eihn en tied, sanoin. Ja enhn min semmoista kysymyst viel kerran esittnee. Niin et ole, mutta katsokaas: jos saisittepa tss keittiss meren pojat laulamaan, ja jos heidn laulussaan kertoisivat, mik maailman alus on ja minklainen, niin nin mahtaisitte tulla siihen tulokseen, ett juuri siksi heidn laulunsa on niin ihmeellinen ja niin vaikeasti tajuttavissa. Maalliset ihmiset eivt voi sit laulua ymmrt, mutta me emme kykn, vaikka olisimme niin kuin he. Katsokaas: kun teill on tuossa esiinnyttv pallo, jolla on kolme kulmaa ja kahdestatoista sivua, niin silloin esille tulee kolme tilaa, ja niiden lisksi kolme tilaa, jotka kantavat puolen piirin, ja niiden lisksi taas kolme tilaa, jotka kantavat puolen toisen puolen; ja silloin yhteens taloja on yhdeksan. Niin, niin, sanovat he. Ja jos tuosta pallosta otatte kaikki puolet pois ja otatte sen puolten piiri, jonka keskell on keskipiste, niin silloin jljelle j viisi tilaa, ja niist joutuu nelj pitkksi ja yksi lyhyeksi. Niin, niin, sanovat he. Ja jos nyt teill on siis viisi tilaa, niin milloin teidn tytyy itse ajatella, ett on lieneek teill kyseess nelj erilaista tilaa tai lieneek siin yksi sama tila neljn eri tavoin? Miten tahansa, sanovat he. Mitp siis, onko kyseess eri tilat vai sama tila? Vaikea asia, sanovat he. Ja jos siis on kyseess eri tiloja, niin silloin on se pienin, joka rajoittuu kolmeen sivuun ja yhteen kulmaan, niin suuri kuin tuo, joka rajoittuu kuuteen sivuun ja neljn kulmaan? Ei varmaankaan, sanovat he. Mill voi silloin olla kyseess? Ehk on samansuuruisia, sanovat he. Ent se, joka rajoittuu viiteen sivuun ja neljn kulmaan, niin suuri kuin tuo, joka rajoittuu seitsemn sivuun ja kuuteen kulmaan? En min ainakaan sit voi sanoa, sanovat he. Mutta sitten onko se pienempi, joka rajoittuu kuuteen sivuun ja neljn kulmaan, vai suurempi, joka rajoittuu seitsemn sivuun ja kuuteen kulmaan? En min sanoa, sanovat he. Ja sitten onko se, joka rajoittuu seitsemn sivuun ja kuuteen kulmaan, pienempi vai suurempi kuin tuo, joka rajoittuu kahdeksaan sivuun ja viiteen kulmaan? En min sanoa, sanovat he. Miksei? Koska eip ole selv, sanovat he. No, katsokaas: se, joka rajoittuu kahdeksaan sivuun ja viiteen kulmaan, on se, joka edell on mainittu, tai jokin toinen? Edell mainittu, sanovat he. Ja joka rajoittuu seitsemn sivuun ja kuuteen kulmaan, on se, jota ennen mainittu, vai jokin toinen? Kyll, jota ennen mainittu, sanovat he. Ja joka rajoittuu kuuteen sivuun ja neljn kulmaan, on se, jota edell on mainittu, vai jokin toinen? Kyll edell mainittu, sanovat he. Ja joka rajoittuu viiteen sivuun ja neljn kulmaan, on se, jota ennen mainittu, vai jokin toinen? Kyll edell mainittu, sanovat he. Ja joka rajoittuu neljn sivun ja kolmen kulman mukaan, on se, jota edell on mainittu, vai jokin toinen? Kyll edell mainittu, sanovat he. Niin, niin, sanoin. Ja joka rajoittuu kolmen sivun ja yhden kulman mukaan, on se, jota ennen mainittu, vai jokin toinen? Kyll ennen mainittu, sanovat he. Niin, niin, sanoin. Ja joka rajoittuu kahden sivun ja kaksi kulman mukaan, on se, jota edell on mainittu, vai jokin toinen? Kyll edell mainittu, sanovat he. Ja joka rajoittuu yhden sivun ja yhden kulman mukaan, on se, jota ennen mainittu, vai jokin toinen? Kyll ennen mainittu, sanovat he. Niin, niin, sanoin. Ja joka rajoittuu ilman mitn, on se, jota edell on mainittu, vai jokin toinen? Kyll edell mainittu, sanovat he. Niin, niin, sanoin. Ja joka rajoittuu ilman mitn, on se, jota ennen mainittu, vai jokin toinen? Kyll ennen mainittu, sanovat he. Niin, niin, sanoin. Niin kyll meidn on selvitettv, ett onko se joka rajoittuu ilman mitn pienempi vai suurempi kuin ne, jotka rajoittuvat jollakin. Selvittp sitten, sanovat he. Oletetaanp sitten, ett ne ovat samanlaista. Tietenkn, sanovat he. Minua nytt, ett ne ovat samanlaisia, mutta onko? Meidn tytyy tutkia asiaa. Tietysti, sanovat he. Olkaamme nyt siis huolellisia, ett ymmrrmme asian hyvin. Pidtte tmn, joka rajoittuu ilman mitn, tasaisena ja suorakulmaisena, ja pidtte samoin ne, jotka rajoittuvat jollain. Nyt katsokaas: kumpi niist on suurempi, niiden korkeus vai pituus? Pituus, sanovat he. Mieltk ihmeellinen menetelm, jolla se nyt on selville saatu! Kuinka? Miksi siis ky ollut aivan selv, ett pituus on isompi kuin korkeus? Vaikea asia, sanovat he. Mutta jos olisitte ottaneet puolikkaan ikkunanraadasta ja katsoneet, mik on sen pituus, niin olisitte varmaan sanoa, ett se on pituus, ei korkeus. Niin me olisimme, sanovat he. Ja jos olisitte kyttneet ky tn vertauskuvaan sopivaa laulua, niin olisitte sitten ymmrtneet saman asian noin kuin tuosta kuvasta. Jospa olisimme, sanovat he. Ja jos se, joka rajoittuu ilman mitn, oli ikkunanraadin kaltaista, niin miten on sen korkeus, miten sen pituus? Sen korkeus on suurempi, sanovat he. Mutta jos se, joka rajoittuu kahden sivun ja kaksi kulman mukaan, olisi suurempikokoista, niin mik on sen korkeus, mik sen pituus? Sen korkeus on suurempi, sanovat he. Ja jos se, joka rajoittuu kolmen sivun ja yhden kulman mukaan, olisi suurempikokoista, niin miten on sen korkeus, miten sen pituus? Sen korkeus on suurempi, sanovat he. Ja jos se, joka rajoittuu neljn sivun ja kolmen kulman mukaan, olisi suurempikokoista, niin miten on sen korkeus, miten sen pituus? Sen korkeus on suurempi, sanovat he. Ja jos se, joka rajoittuu viiteen sivun ja neljn kulman mukaan, olisi suurempikokoista, niin miten on sen korkeus, miten sen pituus? Sen korkeus on suurempi, sanovat he. Ja jos se, joka rajoittuu kuuden sivun ja viiden kulman mukaan, olisi suurempikokoista, niin miten on sen korkeus, miten sen pituus? Sen korkeus on suurempi, sanovat he. Ja jos se, joka rajoittuu seitsemn sivun ja kuuden kulman mukaan, olisi suurempikokoista, niin miten on sen korkeus, miten sen pituus? Sen korkeus on suurempi, sanovat he. Ja jos se, joka rajoittuu kahdeksan sivun ja viiden kulman mukaan, olisi suurempikokoista, niin miten on sen korkeus, miten sen pituus? Sen korkeus on suurempi, sanovat he. Niin, niin, sanoin. Ja jos se, joka rajoittuu yhdeksn sivun ja kuuden kulman mukaan, olisi suurempikokoista, niin miten on sen korkeus, miten sen pituus? Sen korkeus on suurempi, sanovat he. Niin, niin, sanoin. Eik siis ole selv, ett joka tila, joka rajoittuu useammalla sivulla, on suurempi kuin joka tila, joka rajoittuu vhemmill sivuilla? Se on selv, sanovat he. Niin, niin, sanoin. Ja niin, jos se, joka rajoittuu kahdeksan sivun ja viiden kulman mukaan, on suurempi kuin se, joka rajoittuu seitsemn sivun ja kuuden kulman mukaan, niin silloin sen korkeus on suurempi kuin sen? Se on selv, sanovat he. Niin, niin, sanoin. Ja jos se, joka rajoittuu seitsemn sivun ja kuuden kulman mukaan, on suurempi kuin se, joka rajoittuu kuuden sivun ja viiden kulman mukaan, niin silloin sen korkeus on suurempi kuin sen? Se on selv, sanovat he. Niin, niin, sanoin. Ja jos se, joka rajoittuu kuusi sivua ja viisi kulmaa, on suurempi kuin se, joka rajoittuu viiden sivun ja neljn kulman mukaan, niin silloin sen korkeus on suurempi kuin sen? Se on selv, sanovat he. Niin, niin, sanoin. Ja jos se, joka rajoittuu viisi sivua ja nelj kulmaa, on suurempi kuin se, joka rajoittuu neljn sivun ja kolmen kulman mukaan, niin silloin sen korkeus on suurempi kuin sen? Se on selv, sanovat he. Niin, niin, sanoin. Ja jos se, joka rajoittuu nelj sivua ja kolme kulmaa, on suurempi kuin se, joka rajoittuu kolmen sivun ja yhden kulman mukaan, niin silloin sen korkeus on suurempi kuin sen? Se on selv, sanovat he. Niin, niin, sanoin. Ja jos se, joka rajoittuu kolme sivua ja yksi kulma, on suurempi kuin se, joka rajoittuu kahden sivun ja kaksi kulmaa, niin silloin sen korkeus on suurempi kuin sen? Se on selv, sanovat he. Niin, niin, sanoin. Ja jos se, joka rajoittuu kaksi sivua ja kaksi kulmaa, on suurempi kuin se, joka rajoittuu yhden sivun ja yhden kulman mukaan, niin silloin sen korkeus on suurempi kuin sen? Se on selv, sanovat he. Niin, niin, sanoin. Ja jos se, joka rajoittuu yksi sivu ja yksi kulma, on suurempi kuin se, joka rajoittuu ilman mitn, niin silloin sen korkeus on suurempi kuin sen? Se on selv, sanovat he. Niin, niin, sanoin. Niin se on selv, ett se, joka rajoittuu ilman mitn, on pienempi kuin ne, jotka rajoittuvat jollakin. Niin se on selv, sanovat he. Niin, se on selv, sanoin. Ja ett joka tila, joka rajoittuu useammalla sivulla, on suurempi kuin joka tila, joka rajoittuu vhemmill sivuilla? Niin se on selv, sanovat he. Niin, se on selv, sanoin. Sen on siis selv, ett joka tila, joka rajoittuu ilman mitn, on pienempi kuin ne, jotka rajoittuvat jollakin. Se on selv, sanovat he. Niin, se on selv, sanoin. Ja joka tila, joka rajoittuu jollakin, on suurempi kuin ne, jotka rajoittuvat vhemmill sivuilla? Niin se on selv, sanovat he. Niin, se on selv, sanoin. Ja joka tila, joka rajoittuu yhdell sivulla, on suurempi kuin ne, jotka rajoittuvat vhemmill sivuilla? Niin se on selv, sanovat he. Niin, se on selv, sanoin. Ja joka tila, joka rajoittuu kahdella sivulla, on suurempi kuin ne, jotka rajoittuvat vhemmill sivuilla? Niin se on selv, sanovat he. Niin, se on selv, sanoin. Ja joka tila, joka rajoittuu kolmella sivulla, on suurempi kuin ne, jotka rajoittuvat vhemmill sivuilla? Niin se on selv, sanovat he. Niin, se on selv, sanoin. Ja joka tila, joka rajoittuu neljll sivulla, on suurempi kuin ne, jotka rajoittuvat vhemmill sivuilla? Niin se on selv, sanovat he. Niin, se on selv, sanoin. Ja joka tila, joka rajoittuu viidell sivulla +Literary movement: Hardboiled +Active character: Socrates, Glaucon" "The hell I'm going to do!"" he shouted. ""I didn't come here to have a lot of cheese-parer talk handed me! You're taking me for some kind of fool, aren't you?"""" He was livid with rage. I'll tell you what it is, Socrates,"" Glaucon said. ""It's this modern poetry that's doing it. It's got the people all soft in the head."""" Soft in the head!"" Socrates mimicked him. ""Soft in the head! Well, maybe they are, but don't blame it on my poetry, buddy boy! I'd like to see you try to read the stuff I've been handing out lately! If it doesn't make your hair stand up, then you haven't any hair!"""" Socrates wasn't talking about his recent poems. He was referring to those of another poet, a new arrival from Hellas, whom he had been introducing to some of the more literate members of his audience. The newcomer had arrived in Athens only a few days before, and he had already made a deep impression on the city. He had also aroused considerable antagonism among certain older poets, who felt that his success was due largely to the fact that he wrote in a style that was easily understood by the common man. They resented this, claiming that poetry should be reserved for those who were educated and refined enough to appreciate its subtleties. One of these older poets was a friend of Socrates', and the two had become embroiled in a heated argument over the issue. And you know what the guy did?"" Socrates asked Glaucon. """"He actually told me that I should start writing poetry again! Can you imagine that? Me write poetry after all these years! Well, let me tell you something, buddy boy. I haven't written a decent poem since the day I woke up and found that old snake coiled around my neck! As far as I'm concerned, poetry is nothing but a lot of hooey!"""" You may think so,"" Glaucon said, ""but there are still plenty of people out there who love it."""" Yeah, well, you can go tell them to get their heads examined!"" Socrates was furious. ""What do they expect me to write about, anyway? All the good subjects are taken!"""" There are always new subjects to discover,"" Glaucon said. ""You just have to look for them."""" Look for them! Hah! I've been looking for twenty years, and all I've found is a bunch of garbage!"""" You just need to find the right angle,"" Glaucon suggested. ""A fresh perspective."""" Right angle, huh?"" Socrates grunted. ""Okay, smarty, how about this: 'The sun rose, and the dew fell on the sleeping grass.' Is that fresh enough for you?"""" He spoke in a harsh, vivid voice, like one of those movie narrators you hear in Hitchcock movies. " 144 144 "What way? An easy way enough; or rather, there are many ways in which the featmight be quickly and easily accomplished, none quicker than that ofturning a mirror round and round --you would soon enough make thesun and the heavens, and the earth and yourself, and other animalsand plants, and all the, other things of which we were just now speaking,in the mirror. Yes, he said; but they would be appearances only. Very good, I said, you are coming to the point now. And the paintertoo is, as I conceive, just such another --a creator of appearances,is he not? Of course. But then I suppose you will say that what he creates is untrue. Andyet there is a sense in which the painter also creates a bed? @@ -3703,13 +3704,13 @@ The latter. As they are or as they appear? You have still to determine this. What do you mean? I mean, that you may look at a bed from different points of view,obliquely or directly or from any other point of view, and the bedwill appear different, but there is no difference in reality. Andthe same of all things." "Summary: The text discusses the concept of imitation and creation, with a focus on the difference between reality and appearances. Trope: The distinction between reality and appearance Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialogue between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy" "He'd have to be a pretty hot writer, and I'll be damned if he is. The only thing he can do that anybody else can't is he can look at the world through a microscope and a telescope at the same time."""" Are you saying he imitates reality?"" Yeah, but don't forget that what he's doing is creating."""" That's right,"" I said. ""You've got it now. He makes up things that aren't real in such a way that they appear to be real."""" He grinned. """"I'm not so sure about that. For instance, take one of his women characters. Let's say she's supposed to be a woman who's had plenty of men before this fellow meets her and is going to have plenty afterwards. She has to be real enough to make him want her, but she's also got to be unreal enough so that we won't get the wrong idea when he starts throwing his clothes around and acting like a tired stallion."""" I see what you mean."" Sure you do. You're as bright as he is. Only he's a little brighter because he knows more about human nature. The hell with him. Let's go eat. I'm starving."""" We ate and then walked back to the Biltmore. Sam was quiet for a while, thinking hard, but he came out of it finally and asked me: Do you think that's true about the difference between appearance and reality?"""" Yes,"" I said. ""As far as it goes."""" How far does it go?"""" As far as the mind can reach."""" What do you mean?"" He took hold of my arm, and his hand was cold. I looked down at him. His face was pale and there were dark shadows under his eyes. Is something wrong, Sam?"" I said. He shook his head. No. It's nothing. Just something I saw tonight. In a bar."""" Something bad?"" Maybe."" Then he looked up at me suddenly and his voice was almost cheerful again. """"The funny part is, kid, it wasn't even a woman!"""" I stopped walking. This was getting too thick for me. I said: """"What the hell are you talking about?"""" He laughed. """"A man. A queer. Or maybe I should say two men. Two guys. One was a regular guy, just a guy, you know; but the other one was queer. Queer enough so it made me sick to watch him."""" Why did you watch him?"" Because he was watching me. And because I couldn't help it. Goddammit, I don't want to talk about it, okay?"""" Okay,"" I said. ""Let's go inside."" We went inside the Biltmore and walked over to the bar and sat on stools. The bartender came over and Sam ordered bourbon and water. When he had it, he drank half of it in a hurry, put the glass down on the bar and turned to me. Look,"" he said, ""this isn't easy to tell you. " +Literary movement: Hardboiled" Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, but imitation is also a criminal offence. The law allows for a certain amount of copying in the interests of variety; it’s a good thing to have more than one brand of soap. But when you begin to imitate things which are dangerous or harmful, and then put them on the market under a spurious label, that’s where the law draws the line. Now, I think we can take it as certain that the person who invented the double-cross system was a professional criminal, or at any rate had been inside at some time or another, and knew how the police worked. And if he was a really first-class brain, he’d know the difference between what is true and what appears to be true, and he’d know that it would do no harm to plant false clues just for the sake of adding to the confusion. You’ve heard all about this business of “false clues,” I suppose? Well, here’s an example that happened only a week ago in London. A young fellow called Fennell got himself mixed up with some pretty shady characters, and he had to disappear for a bit, and he took refuge in a friend’s house in Kent. Well, he used to go out walking sometimes, and one day he disappeared altogether. They found his hat and coat in the house, and they searched all over the place, and even advertised in the papers, but they couldn’t find a trace of him. Then a little later on, someone saw a man answering his description getting off a boat-train from Dover, and they put two and two together, and started looking for him along the south coast. It was quite simple. There was no need to make it complicated by having false clues. Only these people who want to prove themselves geniuses seem to like complicating things. That’s why I don’t mind admitting that I’m not a genius. I’m just a plain, blunt-spoken American who prefers the truth to anything else. Take this new idea of mine, for instance. I told you last night that I’d got it all worked out now. Well, that isn’t strictly true. All I’ve done is to clear up a few points, and to define my position more accurately. The basic facts haven’t altered at all; there’s no reason why they should. And that’s just what you’ll find if you investigate the affair properly. You’re making it far too complicated. If you don’t believe me, let’s get down to facts again. We’ll start with the gun. Where did you find it? In the library, isn’t it? That’s right. Now the point about that is this: Why was it hidden in the library? It wasn’t there because it belonged to Mr. Rycroft or Miss Milanchamp. It belonged to Mr. Franklin. So why didn’t he leave it in his bedroom? He might have forgotten it, or dropped it anywhere in the house. 145 145 "Yes, he said, the difference is only apparent. Now let me ask you another question: Which is the art of paintingdesigned to be --an imitation of things as they are, or as they appear--of appearance or of reality? Of appearance. Then the imitator, I said, is a long way off the truth, and can doall things because he lightly touches on a small part of them, andthat part an image. For example: A painter will paint a cobbler, carpenter,or any other artist, though he knows nothing of their arts; and, ifhe is a good artist, he may deceive children or simple persons, whenhe shows them his picture of a carpenter from a distance, and theywill fancy that they are looking at a real carpenter. Certainly. And whenever any one informs us that he has found a man knows allthe arts, and all things else that anybody knows, and every singlething with a higher degree of accuracy than any other man --whoevertells us this, I think that we can only imagine to be a simple creaturewho is likely to have been deceived by some wizard or actor whom hemet, and whom he thought all-knowing, because he himself was unableto analyse the nature of knowledge and ignorance and imitation. @@ -3720,15 +3721,15 @@ I should say not. The real artist, who knew what he was imitating, would be inte Yes, he said, that would be to him a source of much greater honourand profit. Then, I said, we must put a question to Homer; not about medicine,or any of the arts to which his poems only incidentally refer: weare not going to ask him, or any other poet, whether he has curedpatients like Asclepius, or left behind him a school of medicine suchas the Asclepiads were, or whether he only talks about medicine andother arts at second hand; but we have a right to know respectingmilitary tactics, politics, education, which are the chiefest andnoblest subjects of his poems, and we may fairly ask him about them.'Friend Homer,' then we say to him, 'if you are only in the secondremove from truth in what you say of virtue, and not in the third--not an image maker or imitator --and if you are able to discernwhat pursuits make men better or worse in private or public life,tell us what State was ever better governed by your help? The goodorder of Lacedaemon is due to Lycurgus, and many other cities greatand small have been similarly benefited by others; but who says thatyou have been a good legislator to them and have done them any good?Italy and Sicily boast of Charondas, and there is Solon who is renownedamong us; but what city has anything to say about you?' Is there anycity which he might name? I think not, said Glaucon; not even the Homerids themselves pretendthat he was a legislator." "Summary: The speaker discusses the difference between painting and reality, and questions whether poets truly understand the subjects they write about. -Enunciation: Third-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation Active character: Glaucon Quoted work: Homer's poems -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "She's a nice old girl, but she wouldn't do for a painter. She's too much like all the rest of us."""" Glaucon felt his face go red. The speaker had put it into words which he would never have dared to use himself, but the insult was none the less sharp because he knew that the speaker spoke the truth. I know what you mean,"" he said at last. ""But you don't understand painting. You can only paint what you see. If you want to paint an ideal you must make your model pose in front of you. When you look at nature you never see the ideal; you only see the real."""" We're very glad you came,"" said Simon. ""You've given us some very useful information."""" He looked anxiously at Glaucon. But I haven't finished yet,"" said Glaucon. ""I wanted to ask you something. Why does Homer call Hera 'the queen of Heaven'?"""" Because she is the queen of heaven,"" said Simon promptly. ""Aren't we sitting here on Olympus?"" But aren't there other gods as well as Hera?"" Yes, but Hera is the best of them."" And if she's the best, why isn't Zeus the king of heaven?"" Well, you see..."" It doesn't seem reasonable,"" said Glaucon. ""Why doesn't Homer say so?"""" Homer didn't know anything about reason. He lived before the days of Socrates."""" So you are saying that Homer was stupid?"" Oh, no! Not at all. He was just ignorant. But poets aren't really interested in their subjects. They only want to write beautiful verse. They don't care whether their stories are true or not."""" That sounds very hardboiled,"" said Simon. ""Doesn't the poet care whether his story is true or not?"""" Of course he cares,"" said Glaucon. ""But he wants to write poetry and not prose. If he told the truth he'd be writing history. If you want to tell a story you've got to exaggerate. Poetry's always lies."""" Not always,"" said Simon. ""Take the Odyssey. It's poetry and it's also true. The adventures of Ulysses really happened."""" Yes, they did,"" said Glaucon. ""It's just as true as the adventures of Theseus when he went down to Hades to fetch Persephone. They're both true, but Homer made up the stories. And if you believe those you ought to believe the others as well."""" But they're different,"" said Simon. ""The adventures of Ulysses really happened, but the adventures of Theseus and Persephone were just inventions."""" No, they weren't,"" said Glaucon. ""They're both true. Only poets are allowed to lie and historians aren't allowed to."""" You've got it wrong,"" said Simon. ""Ulysses wasn't a poet. Odysseus was a liar, and Homer knew he was a liar and wrote poems about him anyway."""" " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "Auch wenn er sie mal wieder absetzt, das sind doch immer nur Farben und Pinselstriche. Da kann man den Menschen nicht von seinen wahren Farben und Strichen unterscheiden. Und da fangen sie an zu lachen und schauen auf mich herab wie ein Bndchen Kinder, die sich ber eine alte Hexe lustig machen. Und das wre ja auch gut genug, wenn ich nur ein kleines Kind wren knnte; aber nein, ich bin ein groes Mdchen, und kein Mensch versteht mich, weil keiner mich ernst nimmt. Und deswegen fluche ich dann so ber jeden und mge ihn gleich hier im Wald finden, wo er sich vor meinen Flchen verstecken kann!"""" Glaucon stand schon einige Zeit ruhig neben ihr und hatte es sehr unbehaglich gefunden, was er hren mute. Jetzt sagte er: """"Nun, nun, nun, du mu mir einmal sagen, warum bist du denn eigentlich so zornig? Ich meine, der Maler hat dir doch keinen Schaden getan, vielleicht kriegst du ja sogar ein paar Bilder von ihm fr deine Wohnung."""" Aber darber habe ich mich nie gekmmert"", erwiderte sie, ""aber was ist das fr ein Mensch, dem wir uns vertrauen sollen? Wie wei ich denn, ob er nicht etwa hinter mir her ist? Vielleicht will er mich gar entwhnen, und ich werde noch in seinem Bilde leben, ohne wirklich zu leben, das ist mir nicht recht, das ist mir nicht recht! Denn bei einem Maler bin ich doch nie sicher, ich sage dir, ich habe mehr als einen Maler gesehen, der sein eigenes Bild ganz lieber in die Hhle eines Fabeltiers oder in die Mitte einer Schlange gesteckt hat, statt es unter seinen Freunden aufzuhngen. Das haben sie alles von Homer gelernt, und das sind die frechen Kerle, denen wir uns vertrauen sollen! Aber ich danke ihnen sehr, Herr Glaucon, ich danke ihnen sehr!"""" Und damit machte sie sich auf den Weg nach Hause. Glaucon sah ihr eine Weile verwirrt nach; dann rief er: """"Hallo, Nausikaa, halt einmal an!"""" Sie blieb stehen und drehte sich um. Er sagte jetzt: """"Du hast recht, das verstehe ich nicht. Es mut ja ziemlich kompliziert sein, was du meinst, sonst wrde jeder es begreifen, der deinen Vater kennt, und der denkt viel nach. Aber du kannst mir doch sagen, woher du wohl wissen willst, da dein Vater ein Dichter ist?"""" Nun"", sagte sie, ""das kann man doch leicht merken, und ich hoffe nur, du bist nicht so dumm, das zu vergessen. Denn die meisten Leute vergessen das eben, und wenn sie mir dann einiges von Homers Gedichten vorsagen, da fangen sie gleich an zu lachen und wollen mich mit ihrem Spott erschrecken, weil ich's nicht auffasse; aber ich mu lachen, wenn ich sehe, da sie's selbst nicht auffassen, und dann mache ich ihnen ganz schnell klar, was sie nicht verstehen, und dann wollen sie wieder lachen, aber ich lache ber sie, und dann wollen sie wieder mich erschrecken, und ich bin froh, da ich weglaufen kann."""" Und wie machst du das?"" fragte Glaucon. " 146 146 "Well, but is there any war on record which was carried on successfullyby him, or aided by his counsels, when he was alive? There is not. Or is there any invention of his, applicable to the arts or to humanlife, such as Thales the Milesian or Anacharsis the Scythian, andother ingenious men have conceived, which is attributed to him? There is absolutely nothing of the kind. But, if Homer never did any public service, was he privately a guideor teacher of any? Had he in his lifetime friends who loved to associatewith him, and who handed down to posterity an Homeric way of life,such as was established by Pythagoras who was so greatly beloved forhis wisdom, and whose followers are to this day quite celebrated forthe order which was named after him? @@ -3741,16 +3742,16 @@ Exactly. Here is another point: The imitator or maker of the image knows nothing Yes. Then let us have a clear understanding, and not be satisfied withhalf an explanation. Proceed. Of the painter we say that he will paint reins, and he will painta bit? Yes. And the worker in leather and brass will make them? Certainly. But does the painter know the right form of the bit and reins? Nay,hardly even the workers in brass and leather who make them; only thehorseman who knows how to use them --he knows their right form." "Summary: The text discusses the lack of evidence that Homer was a wise or influential figure during his lifetime, and questions whether he actually had any knowledge or ability to educate people. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates, Glaucon Quoted character: Homer, Thales the Milesian, Anacharsis the Scythian, Pythagoras, Creophylus -Time setting: Contemporary -Absolute place: A clubhouse in Los Angeles" "The ancient riddle is as old as Homer, who surely knew the answer and was not ashamed to say so. It would be hard to find a man in America who could do what he did. I'm alluding to his knowledge of human nature."""" Glaucon nodded. """"I believe you're right,"""" he said. Well, if it wasn't for Homer's wisdom we might have been spared the tragedy of the Trojan war. But there are no records that he was ever wise or influential during his lifetime. And even if he had been, how do you know he really had any knowledge or ability to educate people?"""" What makes you think he didn't?"" Because it's one thing to observe people, and quite another to understand them. All you can say about him is that he was a good observer, which doesn't mean he was wise. He may have been just an ordinary, commonplace, small-town lawyer with a flair for story-telling and a knack for keeping the peace by doing nothing but talking. If you go through his books you'll find little or no evidence of wisdom, and only a few half-baked notions about education. For instance: he says the two things most important for a boy are music and gymnastics. Now, what kind of education does that suggest? A combination of dancing lessons and a YMCA membership?"""" Well,"" replied Socrates, ""if you want to take up the defense of his system of education you must first tell me what kind of education you recommend instead."" I don't want to argue,"" returned Glaucon, ""I just want to ask you some questions. " +Time setting: 1950s +Absolute place: A clubhouse in Los Angeles" "Homer, with all his wisdom and influence, left no evidence whatever that he was ever consulted by anybody during his lifetime except the Athenians when they wanted to know who should be the most beautiful of their future generals. He had been a good soldier himself, but he was not a good teacher. He could not educate people. Socrates said so; and Socrates knew about such things."""" So he did,"" I agreed. ""And there's another thing: I don't think he ever heard of Thales the Milesian or Anacharsis the Scythian or Pythagoras or Creophylus or any of the other fellows you get in the proems. He wasn't much on information, Homer wasn't. You can see it in his poetry. It's full of stupid mistakes. He didn't know how many gods there were, for one thing."""" That's true, too."" There are more than one reason why I don't believe Homer knew anything at all,"" I went on. ""He doesn't seem to have had any knowledge of elementary physics, for instance, and he didn't understand the simplest things in astronomy."""" The last remark seemed to strike Glaucon rather hard, for he leaned forward eagerly to protest: """"But what about the stars! You remember how he describes the stars as burning stones?"""" Yes, I do; and I know what he got that idea from, too. He'd seen fire-flies and thought they were stars. And then he says that when the sun goes down they go out. Well, fire-flies do go out when the sun goes down; but you wouldn't expect him to know that, would you? They go out because the light is too bright for them, and then, after awhile, when it gets dark enough they begin to shine again, just like glow-worms do. But you see, Glaucon, Homer didn't know that. He thought they went out because the sun put them out."""" I suppose you're right,"" he admitted reluctantly. ""There's nothing new in that, though. We've all done that kind of thing in our time. Only we don't make poems out of it afterwards."""" No; that's where he was better educated than we are,"" I explained. ""I'll tell you something else he didn't know, though. You remember how he says that the moon has two horns?"""" Certainly,"" Glaucon assented. ""Everybody knows that. Why, even men who haven't read the 'Iliad' know that the moon has two horns. When she's waxing they say she's getting her horns together, and when she's waning they say she's letting them fall apart."""" I'm glad you noticed that,"" I exclaimed. ""It shows you really are an intelligent fellow. How in God's name did you happen to notice it?"""" Oh, I didn't notice it,"" he replied. ""I only remembered hearing somebody saying it once. " 147 147 "Most true. And may we not say the same of all things? What? That there are three arts which are concerned with all things: onewhich uses, another which makes, a third which imitates them? Yes. And the excellence or beauty or truth of every structure, animateor inanimate, and of every action of man, is relative to the use forwhich nature or the artist has intended them. True. Then the user of them must have the greatest experience of them, andhe must indicate to the maker the good or bad qualities which developthemselves in use; for example, the flute-player will tell the flute-makerwhich of his flutes is satisfactory to the performer; he will tellhim how he ought to make them, and the other will attend to his instructions? @@ -3773,13 +3774,13 @@ Very true. Then that part of the soul which has an opinion contrary to measureis True. And the better part of the soul is likely to be that which truststo measure and calculation? Certainly. And that which is opposed to them is one of the inferior principlesof the soul?" "Summary: The text discusses the relationship between different arts and their ability to imitate reality, highlighting the limitations of imitation and the superiority of knowledge. Narrative arc: Philosophical exploration and argument -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical conversation -Active character: Two characters engaged in a conversation" "You'd think he'd have given it up long ago, but I guess he figures he'll never get caught. What do you think of it?"""" I've been told,"" I said, ""that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery."""" Then what's wrong with him?"" You can't imitate reality. It's a losing game."""" A losing game!"" He considered this for a moment. """"Well, there must be something in that. But how about art?"""" We're artists,"" I reminded him. """"We're trying to make reality come alive on paper. How do we do it? By imitation, right? Isn't that just what we're doing?"""" Not exactly,"" I said. ""We're not trying to imitate reality as such, but people and their reactions to reality."""" So we're people-watching, huh? And when we put them down on paper we're still imitating them, aren't we?"""" Well, not exactly,"" I said again. ""I don't mean to quibble, but . . ."""" But you always do,"" he interrupted. ""Quit quibbling and tell me what you think."" I thought it over for a moment. """"When we're writing about somebody's life and the things that happen to him, I suppose we are imitating him in a way. But that's not our main concern. When you write about people in action, you try to keep your eye on the action, on what's really happening. If you want to show what kind of person he is, you let his actions speak for him. You see?"""" Sure,"" he said. ""But if you want to show what kind of person he is, why don't you just tell us? Why all the subtleties?"""" Because I'm an artist,"" I said. ""That's what an artist does. He doesn't tell us, he shows us."""" He nodded. """"And since you're painting a picture, so to speak, you've got to rely on imitating the subject."""" No,"" I said. ""If I were just painting a picture, then yes, I'd have to imitate the subject, because the only thing I'd know about him would be what I could see. But as a writer, I'm not limited to what I can see. I can dig inside him and find out who he is and what he's all about. In other words, I can go beyond imitation and know him."""" I can see where that would give you quite a leg up on the ordinary painter,"" he said. ""But wouldn't you need some pretty heavy knowledge to handle the job?"""" Heavy knowledge?"" Yes,"" I said. ""And experience. Without those, you couldn't even begin."""" Sounds like you've got one helluva job on your hands,"" he said. ""How do you ever get started?"""" " +Active character: Two characters engaged in a conversation" Well, the art of the camera and the cinema is very close to that. The art of the detective novel is rather different; it does not try to give you a picture which you can mistake for reality, but to produce that peculiar thrill which follows from surprise, and, in addition, sometimes that terror which follows from the threat of violence. But, as I say, the interest lies in the arrangement of the clues, and therefore in the knowledge. If you are thinking of the feelings which the detective fiction produces, then you should be thinking of the nature of those feelings themselves. And these, once more, lie in the realm of knowledge and expectation. When we see a film of someone being murdered, we enjoy it because we know that he will be murdered, but also because we do not know how it will be done. We have a feeling of suspense. This feeling is a species of fear, but it is not the same as the fear which would arise if we thought that we ourselves were in danger of being killed. It is a curious mental state, and the enjoyment depends upon our knowledge of the fact that we are safe, that no real harm is coming to us. So it is with all the arts. You may take pleasure in contemplating the sufferings of others, but only provided that you do so at a distance, and knowing that they are make-believe. 148 148 "No doubt. This was the conclusion at which I was seeking to arrive when I saidthat painting or drawing, and imitation in general, when doing theirown proper work, are far removed from truth, and the companions andfriends and associates of a principle within us which is equally removedfrom reason, and that they have no true or healthy aim. Exactly. The imitative art is an inferior who marries an inferior, and hasinferior offspring. Very true. And is this confined to the sight only, or does it extend to the hearingalso, relating in fact to what we term poetry? @@ -3800,15 +3801,15 @@ Yes, he said, that is the true way of meeting the attacks of fortune. Yes, I said; and the higher principle is ready to follow this suggestionof reason? Clearly. And the other principle, which inclines us to recollection of ourtroubles and to lamentation, and can never have enough of them, wemay call irrational, useless, and cowardly?" "Summary: The speaker discusses the imitative arts and their connection to truth and reason. Narrative arc: Philosophical discussion -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation Active character: The speaker, the person being addressed -Time setting: Contemporary -Diegetic time: A few minutes" """""You and I were talking about the imitative arts,"""" I said. """"I take it that you regard them as a sort of game, where the object is to try to deceive the spectator into accepting something for something else."""" He nodded his head in acquiescence. """"It was not always so,"""" he said, """"but it has been so from the earliest times. In all the great civilizations of the past there have been men who have regarded this art of illusion as a fine thing in itself."""" I felt myself being drawn deeper and deeper into the morass of his own special brand of mysticism, and I struggled against it. """"In other words,"""" I said, """"you mean that people like painting pictures or writing plays or novels because they like to fool around with false appearances and make believe?"""" You are getting nearer the truth,"" he said. ""But you are still far from it."""" I shrugged my shoulders. """"I suppose you think it's a fine thing for a man to go through life fooling everybody, even himself?"""" It is better than going through life without ever trying to find out what things really are."" There was something in that, but I didn't say so. """"I don't understand you,"""" I said. """"I'm afraid I never shall."""" The truth is always simple,"" he said. ""Perhaps I have made it seem too complicated for you. And yet if I told you the truth about the imitative arts, you would be even more puzzled than you are now."""" Well, if you want to talk about it, why not?"" Why not indeed! If I can't solve these problems for you, it's certainly no fault of mine. I must say that your attitude is very flattering."""" I'm glad you think so. But we were talking about these imitative arts. What is their connection with the truth and the reason?"""" I've told you what it is."" Yes, yes; but I don't understand. Suppose you tell me again. Perhaps then I'll get it."""" The imitative arts are the means by which man seeks to express the truth in terms of nature. They are the means whereby he may interpret the natural world in terms of his own intellect."""" I understood that part of it, but I couldn't see how it applied to detective fiction. """"I still don't see what you mean,"""" I said. """"How does your story about the hound on the moors express the truth? It's just a lot of lies strung together."""" Not necessarily,"" he said. ""The thing to do is to put yourself in the place of the reader. You have read many stories about murder and mystery. Most of them have been told in the form of a narrative. " +Time setting: 1950s +Diegetic time: A few minutes" I’m afraid that the imitative arts are going to have a bad time of it in the next decade. People will begin to realise how much of their pleasure they get from things that aren’t true, and they’ll turn away from them. It’s very hard for people to be both truthful and reasonable at the same time; but there are plenty of things that are neither.” “It all depends what you mean by ‘true’,” said the other man. “You can make something true just by saying it loudly enough.” “No, you can’t. You can only make it seem true. And don’t start talking about subjective truth, because we’re not in a seminar-room now. I mean objective truth. Truth as a statement about the nature of the universe.” “Then what about our own nature? Is that objective too?” “I don’t know. I wish I did.” There was another pause. The speaker went on: “Of course, we could talk about something else if you’d rather.” “No, let’s finish this first. What do you mean, it’s going to be a bad time for the imitative arts? If you think we’re going to believe less in films and plays and television, you’re wrong. We’ve got more time to waste than ever before. In fact, we shall probably invent some new ones.” “What sort of things do you think people will be doing with their leisure time in the next ten years?” “Well, you might find out. Go round and ask the men who are building the houses and cars and washing machines that we’re all going to buy. They work nine hours a day to keep themselves and their families alive and then they go home and watch television. That’s their idea of leisure. But it isn’t mine. Television is like a big glass wall that keeps us inside. It stops us getting bored and seeing how rotten our lives really are. But it also stops us doing anything about it.” “So you want people to be less well off?” “Yes, I do. I want them to be poor. I want them to starve. I want them to freeze to death. I want them to die young. I want them to suffer. I want them to be unhappy.” “Why?” “Because they deserve it.” “That’s a bit harsh. What do you suppose they’ve done to deserve it?” “They haven’t done anything. But they ought to have done something. I expect you’re old enough to remember the war, so you know what it’s like to be hungry, cold and frightened sometimes. Well, now everyone has forgotten what that feels like except me.” “And you enjoy remembering it?” “Not exactly enjoying. Just remembering it.” “What makes you different from other people?” “If you mean am I mad, I’ll admit that too. But it’s no use asking me why I’m mad. I told you already, didn’t I? Because I’m sane.” “I’m beginning to see what you mean about the imitative arts. 149 149 "Indeed, we may. And does not the latter --I mean the rebellious principle --furnisha great variety of materials for imitation? Whereas the wise and calmtemperament, being always nearly equable, is not easy to imitate orto appreciate when imitated, especially at a public festival whena promiscuous crowd is assembled in a theatre. For the feeling representedis one to which they are strangers. Certainly. Then the imitative poet who aims at being popular is not by naturemade, nor is his art intended, to please or to affect the principlein the soul; but he will prefer the passionate and fitful temper,which is easily imitated? Clearly. And now we may fairly take him and place him by the side of the painter,for he is like him in two ways: first, inasmuch as his creations havean inferior degree of truth --in this, I say, he is like him; andhe is also like him in being concerned with an inferior part of thesoul; and therefore we shall be right in refusing to admit him intoa well-ordered State, because he awakens and nourishes and strengthensthe feelings and impairs the reason. As in a city when the evil arepermitted to have authority and the good are put out of the way, soin the soul of man, as we maintain, the imitative poet implants anevil constitution, for he indulges the irrational nature which hasno discernment of greater and less, but thinks the same thing at onetime great and at another small-he is a manufacturer of images andis very far removed from the truth. @@ -3819,16 +3820,16 @@ Very true, he said. Now can we be right in praising and admiring another who is No, he said, that is certainly not reasonable. Nay, I said, quite reasonable from one point of view. What point of view? If you consider, I said, that when in misfortune we feel a naturalhunger and desire to relieve our sorrow by weeping and lamentation,and that this feeling which is kept under control in our own calamitiesis satisfied and delighted by the poets;-the better nature in eachof us, not having been sufficiently trained by reason or habit, allowsthe sympathetic element to break loose because the sorrow is another's;and the spectator fancies that there can be no disgrace to himselfin praising and pitying any one who comes telling him what a goodman he is, and making a fuss about his troubles; he thinks that thepleasure is a gain, and why should he be supercilious and lose thisand the poem too? Few persons ever reflect, as I should imagine, thatfrom the evil of other men something of evil is communicated to themselves.And so the feeling of sorrow which has gathered strength at the sightof the misfortunes of others is with difficulty repressed in our own. How very true! And does not the same hold also of the ridiculous? There are jestswhich you would be ashamed to make yourself, and yet on the comicstage, or indeed in private, when you hear them, you are greatly amusedby them, and are not at all disgusted at their unseemliness; --thecase of pity is repeated; --there is a principle in human nature whichis disposed to raise a laugh, and this which you once restrained byreason, because you were afraid of being thought a buffoon, is nowlet out again; and having stimulated the risible faculty at the theatre,you are betrayed unconsciously to yourself into playing the comicpoet at home." "Summary: The text discusses the nature of imitative poetry and its effects on the soul. Narrative arc: Philosophical argument -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical discussion -Literary movement: Enlightenment philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The speaker and the person being addressed -Time setting: Contemporary -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "The truth is, that the nature of imitation in poetry is to represent things either as they are or as they appear. Now, if it is true, as you suppose, that the soul of man is like a mirror, then this faculty of imitation will produce its effect by striking the mirror with itself; and when the soul has been struck by some image, it will retain the impression which it has received; just as the seal impresses upon wax an image of itself, but still remains entire."""" But what does all this signify?"" replied I. ""Either you are speaking nonsense, or else you have not explained yourself clearly."""" The very thing,"" said he, ""that I am trying to do."" You are talking quite at random, then,"" said I. ""If it were possible for me to comprehend your meaning, I should consider myself fortunate; but now I understand nothing about it."""" Why, as to understanding,"" said he, ""you may be sure that if you were not quite dull you would understand every word I said."""" You are a rascal,"" I cried. """"What do you mean?"""" Well,"" said he, ""are you sure that you really want to know?"""" Certainly I do,"" said I. ""I am anxious to learn something from you, and therefore I ask you again to tell me plainly."""" " +Time setting: 1950s +Diegetic time: A few minutes" La poesia imitativa non mai bella; sempre brutta, sebbene spesso efficace. I grandi poeti antichi hanno saputo farne uso per fare parlare i loro personaggi, ma non l'hanno mai abusata per descrivere le cose della natura o per dare la rappresentazione dei sentimenti del proprio spirito. E' vero che quando si tratta di descrivere una scena d'omicidio o una scena di violenza carnale, la poesia imitativa ha moltissimo da fare e pu essere di aiuto al romanziere. Ma bisogna usare questa poesia con molta cautela, perch se non si controlla essa finisce col dominare il romanziere e costringerlo a produrre una serie di scene tutte uguali. La poesia imitativa come un veleno, che se preso in piccole dosi pu rinfocare le energie dell'anima, se preso in grosse dosi pu uccidere. L'uso di questo veleno viene giustificato dalla necessit di risalire con esattezza nei dettagli pi minuti alla natura umana. Ma non bisogna mai dimenticare che questo veleno deve essere usato con molta cautela e solo quando l'autore sia certo di poterne resistere e di non esserne sopraffatto. Un altro veleno che oggi pu essere di grande aiuto ai romanziere cos come agli attori, e che poi finisce col rovinarli, quello che noi chiamiamo emozione. Si sa bene che l'emozione ha due lati: uno tragico e uno comico. Ora, nell'agguato dell'assassino, nel covo dell'organizzatore di gangster e soprattutto nella casbah, dovrebbero essere presenti tutti gli elementi necessari per provocare un effetto drammatico. Ma io sono convinto che bisogna evitare accuratamente ogni elemento drammatico, qualunque cosa ne sia l'origine. Bisogna provare ad agire sulla pelle dei lettori attraverso una sensazione di terrore, di angoscia, di disgusto fisico; ma bisogna assolutamente evitare di stimolarli con l'emozione. L'emozione un veleno molto pericoloso per un romanzo poliziesco, perch entra fatalmente in conflitto con il senso della verit, e siccome l'emozione pi forte della verit, il risultato finale sar quasi sempre un insuccesso. Non vi sar n vero dramma, n vera poesia, n vero realismo. Solo la terribile sensazione fisica prodotta dal contatto diretto con un ambiente depravato, estrapolato dal suo contesto e posto dinanzi agli occhi del lettore in tutta la sua evidenza, pu avere una profonda azione sull'anima del lettore. Per tutto ci ho fatto un grosso sacrificio. Ho rinunciato alla possibilit di creare una impressione drammatica, per ridurre al minimo l'effetto della poesia imitativa e per diminuire alquanto anche l'uso dell'emozione. Ho preferito di molto una realt pi grigia e pi fredda, una rappresentazione pi asciutta e pi impersonale. Sono stato costretto a fare un sacrificio ancora maggiore per quanto riguarda il mio racconto; non mi possibile seguire qui passo passo il metodo di indagine del commissario Maudru e dovr accontentarmi di tracciarne il quadro generale. 150 150 "Quite true, he said. And the same may be said of lust and anger and all the other affections,of desire and pain and pleasure, which are held to be inseparablefrom every action ---in all of them poetry feeds and waters the passionsinstead of drying them up; she lets them rule, although they oughtto be controlled, if mankind are ever to increase in happiness andvirtue. I cannot deny it. Therefore, Glaucon, I said, whenever you meet with any of the eulogistsof Homer declaring that he has been the educator of Hellas, and thathe is profitable for education and for the ordering of human things,and that you should take him up again and again and get to know himand regulate your whole life according to him, we may love and honourthose who say these things --they are excellent people, as far astheir lights extend; and we are ready to acknowledge that Homer isthe greatest of poets and first of tragedy writers; but we must remainfirm in our conviction that hymns to the gods and praises of famousmen are the only poetry which ought to be admitted into our State.For if you go beyond this and allow the honeyed muse to enter, eitherin epic or lyric verse, not law and the reason of mankind, which bycommon consent have ever been deemed best, but pleasure and pain willbe the rulers in our State. That is most true, he said. And now since we have reverted to the subject of poetry, let thisour defence serve to show the reasonableness of our former judgmentin sending away out of our State an art having the tendencies whichwe have described; for reason constrained us. But that she may imputeto us any harshness or want of politeness, let us tell her that thereis an ancient quarrel between philosophy and poetry; of which thereare many proofs, such as the saying of 'the yelping hound howlingat her lord,' or of one 'mighty in the vain talk of fools,' and 'themob of sages circumventing Zeus,' and the 'subtle thinkers who arebeggars after all'; and there are innumerable other signs of ancientenmity between them. Notwithstanding this, let us assure our sweetfriend and the sister arts of imitation that if she will only proveher title to exist in a well-ordered State we shall be delighted toreceive her --we are very conscious of her charms; but we may noton that account betray the truth. I dare say, Glaucon, that you areas much charmed by her as I am, especially when she appears in Homer? @@ -3836,13 +3837,13 @@ Yes, indeed, I am greatly charmed. Shall I propose, then, that she be allowed to Certainly. And we may further grant to those of her defenders who are loversof poetry and yet not poets the permission to speak in prose on herbehalf: let them show not only that she is pleasant but also usefulto States and to human life, and we will listen in a kindly spirit;for if this can be proved we shall surely be the gainers --I mean,if there is a use in poetry as well as a delight? Certainly, he said, we shall the gainers. If her defence fails, then, my dear friend, like other persons whoare enamoured of something, but put a restraint upon themselves whenthey think their desires are opposed to their interests, so too mustwe after the manner of lovers give her up, though not without a struggle.We too are inspired by that love of poetry which the education ofnoble States has implanted in us, and therefore we would have herappear at her best and truest; but so long as she is unable to makegood her defence, this argument of ours shall be a charm to us, whichwe will repeat to ourselves while we listen to her strains; that wemay not fall away into the childish love of her which captivates themany. At all events we are well aware that poetry being such as wehave described is not to be regarded seriously as attaining to thetruth; and he who listens to her, fearing for the safety of the citywhich is within him, should be on his guard against her seductionsand make our words his law." "Summary: The text discusses the role of poetry in a well-ordered State and argues that it should not be allowed to influence the passions and desires of the people. Narrative arc: Philosophical argument -Enunciation: Dialogue between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical discourse -Active character: Glaucon, Socrates" Alors, dit Glaucon, il ne faudrait pas qu'un poete enrage de son art et tentant de nous exciter les moeurs par la voix du rythme et par l'assouvissement de nos desirs eut assez de talent pour nous faire oublier que nous sommes hommes. - Oui, dit Socrates, un tel poete devrait tre puni comme le piqueur qui, sachant le poison, aurait corrompu l'eau des fontaines publiques. - Mais n'est-ce pas, reprit Glaucon, ce qui arrive chaque jour? - Oui, mon ami, repondit Socrates, c'est ce qui arrive chaque jour, car nous avons tous deux mme senti en nous-mmes cette agitacion amicale. N'y a-t-il pas aussi dans notre ame une autre partie dont le nom est gourmandise, et qui aime le plaisir et voudrait toujours avoir plus de plaisir? - Assurement, dit Glaucon. - Eh bien! elle est en rapport avec celle-ci, et en consquence elles se portent mal l'une pour l'autre quand elles ne sont pas bien reglees et harmonieuses. Et cependant, en supposant qu'elles soient tout fait accordes entre elles, elles fourniront au poete toutes sortes de mouvements pour son chant. Car la foule est compose de ces deux parties qui se trouvent en nous; et l'on peut dire qu'elle est une. Enfin, considrez, si vous voulez, l'ame d'un homme ou d'une femme, et vous verrez bien que c'est la chose du monde qui ressemble le plus une ville. - Sans doute, dit Glaucon. - Donc, poursuivit Socrate, je suppose que nous pouvons bien dire que la foule, ainsi que la ville, doit tre gouvernee par un sage qui connat la musique. - Certainement, dit Glaucon. - Eh bien! n'importe quel citoyen possde-t-il la science musicale? - Non certes. - Il faut donc qu'il y ait des musiciens professionnels qui exercent sur la foule leur influence reguliere. - Il est incontestable, dit Glaucon. - Voila pour la multitude. Mais il faut encore distinguer les divers genres de passions. Deux d'entre eux sont fort faciles reconatre: l'amour de l'argent et l'amour de la gloire. - C'est vrai, dit Glaucon. - Mais y en a-t-il d'autres? - Sans doute, rpondit Glaucon, qui pensa aussitt l'amour des plaisirs charnels. - Cela me semble difficile, dit Socrate, puisque ceux-ci sont nourris par la gourmandise, et que la gourmandise est sous le contrle de l'amour. - Eh bien! dit Glaucon, il y en a encore un autre que j'ai souvent remarque chez mes amis. +Active character: Glaucon, Socrates" Glaucon, at the close of the last book, when he praised the State which we had described as one inclined to make war against the world, was quite right. In our own day you may hear people saying what a sad thing it is that the great poets are always having to sing the praises of wars and other such evils; but when our State abandons these ways, the tragedy-writers will have nothing to do, and will die out of existence: their poems will be useless. Or again, I think you may see what an effect our poetry will have on the minds of the young men. Their desire for victory in war will inspire them with a noble courage. If they are defeated, instead of being filled with melancholy and regret, they will be ready to fight again, because they will see in defeat no disgrace, but rather glory. For he who thinks that he is really reborn into another life, is not a man who will break down under suffering or death. Such a spirit will be steadfast, both in war and in peace. Poetry has a great power of creating belief about things divine and human, either a good or an evil effect. 151 151 "Yes, he said, I quite agree with you. Yes, I said, my dear Glaucon, for great is the issue at stake, greaterthan appears, whether a man is to be good or bad. And what will anyone be profited if under the influence of honour or money or power,aye, or under the excitement of poetry, he neglect justice and virtue? Yes, he said; I have been convinced by the argument, as I believethat any one else would have been. And yet no mention has been made of the greatest prizes and rewardswhich await virtue. @@ -3865,17 +3866,17 @@ But does any of these dissolve or destroy her? --and here do not letus fall into Yes. Consider the soul in like manner. Does the injustice or other evilwhich exists in the soul waste and consume her? Do they by attachingto the soul and inhering in her at last bring her to death, and soseparate her from the body ? Certainly not. And yet, I said, it is unreasonable to suppose that anything can perishfrom without through affection of external evil which could not bedestroyed from within by a corruption of its own?" "Summary: The speaker discusses the concept of good and evil, arguing that corruption within a thing cannot destroy it from without. Narrative arc: Philosophical argument -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical discussion -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Glaucon, the speaker -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "The corruption is in the thing, and can't be destroyed from without. And in this case you must remember that it's not good or bad as long as it remains within the limits of its own nature, but when it breaks them, then it becomes wicked and is punished. That's what I think about good and evil."""" The man who spoke was Glaucon, and his words were addressed to Socrates, who sat listening with a smile on his face. The rest of us listened too, for we were all in love with the conversation which he had begun just after dinner. He wanted to know whether good was desirable in itself or only for the sake of something else. In other words, if you are hungry, do you want food because it is pleasant or because it satisfies your hunger? If you have pain in your tooth, do you want the dentist because he gives you pleasure or because he stops the pain? Glaucon thought that the good was always desirable in itself, and that the pleasant was only desirable for the sake of something else. This led him into many curious questions, and he made me feel quite sick at heart, for I was obliged to confess that I did not understand either my own argument or his. Then Socrates said: " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "You know the story of the good and the beautiful?"""" The Greek knows it. He's in this country as a foreign student."""" Then I'll tell you about it."" Glaucon, son of Ariston, what say we go for a ride?"" You bet,"" said Glaucon. ""But where to?"" Any place you want. Just come on."""" They got into the big car with the high black fenders and the bullet-shaped hood. It was midnight, and the streets were empty. They went up into the hills and turned off the road onto a dirt track that led nowhere. They stopped at the top of a hill and looked down over the city, all lighted up like a Christmas tree, the lights blinking in the darkness. Good God!"" said Glaucon. ""It's beautiful!"""" It sure is,"" said the other. ""Wouldn't you like to own it all, Glaucon?"""" Of course I would."" Well, suppose somebody came along and took a can of gasoline and threw it out the window here, and set fire to it, what would happen then?"""" Oh, that would burn out in a few minutes,"" said Glaucon. ""That wouldn't destroy the city."" No. Suppose somebody came along and threw a couple hundred gallons of gasoline out the window, and set fire to it. Would that destroy the city?"""" Why no,"" said Glaucon. ""A thing like this has a certain amount of resistance to fire. A little fire doesn't hurt it."""" Suppose somebody threw a thousand gallons of gasoline out the window and set fire to it. Would that destroy the city?"""" Why no,"" said Glaucon. ""There's still enough left to fight the fire."""" All right,"" said the other. ""Suppose somebody kept doing that for five years. Wouldn't that destroy the city?"""" Why no,"" said Glaucon. ""It might take a little longer, but it wouldn't destroy it."""" Well, now let's suppose there was some kind of a force inside the city which spread from one part of the city to another and made every part just exactly like every other part. And let's suppose that wherever this force went, it destroyed everything it touched. Wouldn't that destroy the city?"""" Glaucon thought about it. """"I don't know,"" he said. """"It might."""" All right,"" said the other. ""Now suppose somebody came along and injected that force into one part of the city, and it spread from there until it had infected the whole city. Wouldn't that destroy the city?"""" I think so,"" said Glaucon. ""Yes sir, that would destroy it, all right."""" Well,"" said the other, ""that's corruption, and that's what you're up against. And if you're not careful, that's what will destroy you."""" XIII. When they got back to the house, Marlowe found the door locked. He knocked on the window, but nobody answered. He pulled out his gun and shot out the lock. " 152 152 "It is, he replied. Consider, I said, Glaucon, that even the badness of food, whetherstaleness, decomposition, or any other bad quality, when confinedto the actual food, is not supposed to destroy the body; although,if the badness of food communicates corruption to the body, then weshould say that the body has been destroyed by a corruption of itself,which is disease, brought on by this; but that the body, being onething, can be destroyed by the badness of food, which is another,and which does not engender any natural infection --this we shallabsolutely deny? Very true. And, on the same principle, unless some bodily evil can produce anevil of the soul, we must not suppose that the soul, which is onething, can be dissolved by any merely external evil which belongsto another? Yes, he said, there is reason in that. Either then, let us refute this conclusion, or, while it remains unrefuted,let us never say that fever, or any other disease, or the knife putto the throat, or even the cutting up of the whole body into the minutestpieces, can destroy the soul, until she herself is proved to becomemore unholy or unrighteous in consequence of these things being doneto the body; but that the soul, or anything else if not destroyedby an internal evil, can be destroyed by an external one, is not to.be affirmed by any man. @@ -3890,15 +3891,15 @@ What do you mean? he said. The soul, I said, being, as is now proven, immortal, Certainly not. Her immortality is demonstrated by the previous argument, and thereare many other proofs; but to see her as she really is, not as wenow behold her, marred by communion with the body and other miseries,you must contemplate her with the eye of reason, in her original purity;and then her beauty will be revealed, and justice and injustice andall the things which we have described will be manifested more clearly.Thus far, we have spoken the truth concerning her as she appears atpresent, but we must remember also that we have seen her only in acondition which may be compared to that of the sea-god Glaucus, whoseoriginal image can hardly be discerned because his natural membersare broken off and crushed and damaged by the waves in all sorts ofways, and incrustations have grown over them of seaweed and shellsand stones, so that he is more like some monster than he is to hisown natural form. And the soul which we behold is in a similar condition,disfigured by ten thousand ills. But not there, Glaucon, not theremust we look." "Summary: The text discusses the relationship between the body and the soul, arguing that the soul cannot be destroyed by external evils unless they also affect the soul itself. It also explores the immortality of the soul. Trope: The soul-body dichotomy Narrative arc: Philosophical argument -Enunciation: Dialogue between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Glaucon -Time setting: Contemporary" If the soul is in a state of health and happiness, then it is naturally inclined to follow the right path and avoid sin. However, if the body is ill or in pain, then the soul may become distracted and fall prey to temptation. In short, the text argues that the soul cannot be destroyed by external evils unless they also affect the soul itself. Immortality of the Soul The text also discusses the immortality of the soul. Glaucon argues that since the soul is immortal, it must be made up of an eternal substance. Socrates agrees with this argument but suggests that the soul is also susceptible to bodily corruption and decay. To prevent this, Socrates proposes the idea of reincarnation, where the soul is reborn into a new body after death. This allows the soul to escape the corruption of the body and continue on its journey towards enlightenment. Overall, the text explores the complex relationship between the body and the soul, arguing that the soul is both mortal and immortal. It also introduces the concept of reincarnation as a way for the soul to escape the limitations of the physical world. +Time setting: 1950s" "The body cannot be destroyed by any external evil. The soul, however, can be destroyed by any external evil which is greater than itself and so affects the soul."""" Glaucon laughed again: """"That's a pretty safe rule, isn't it?"""" It's just as safe as the soul is strong,"" I said. ""There are some souls that would stand up to a blow with a sledge hammer, and there are some that couldn't stand up to a light slap in the face. But it's not the kind of blow that matters, but the strength of the soul that stands it."""" Do you mean to say that the soul has nothing to do with death?"" he asked. I'm saying more than that. A man may die because his heart gets broken or because he steps on a rusty nail. There are a million ways of dying, but only one way of being dead. You're alive because your body functions. If anything stops the body from functioning, you're dead. And if you understand this, you also understand that life and death have nothing to do with the soul."""" The soul is like a little world,"" he said. ""It's an entire universe within the universe. Death means the end of everything in that universe except the soul itself."""" That's right,"" I said. ""But there's something wrong with the logic. If the soul was really an entire universe, how could it live inside another universe without being destroyed?"""" I don't know,"" he said. ""I've never heard of this before."" This is what I mean when I say that most people think about the soul instead of thinking about themselves. If the soul is an entire universe, then it must be bigger than the body. If it was smaller, it would be inside the body like a piece of sand inside an oyster. But the soul is supposed to rule the body, and if it was smaller it would be ruled by the body. So it must be bigger, and since the body is part of the material universe, the soul must be outside the material universe."""" I see,"" he said. ""So that means that the soul must be immortal."""" Yes,"" I said. ""And we'll talk about that later. Right now we'll get back to the question of good and evil."""" But you haven't finished telling me about the soul yet,"" he objected. I haven't finished telling you about anything,"" I said. ""I'm only starting. When I finish, maybe you'll understand why I want you to give me a report about your soul."""" CHAPTER 9 It was almost eight o'clock when I walked into the office. Kelly was sitting at the desk, smoking a cigarette and reading the newspaper. He looked up and grinned when he saw me. Hello,"" he said. ""How did you make out with your friend?"""" I dumped my raincoat and hat onto the rack and sat down behind the desk. " 153 153 "Where then? At her love of wisdom. Let us see whom she affects, and what societyand converse she seeks in virtue of her near kindred with the immortaland eternal and divine; also how different she would become if whollyfollowing this superior principle, and borne by a divine impulse outof the ocean in which she now is, and disengaged from the stones andshells and things of earth and rock which in wild variety spring uparound her because she feeds upon earth, and is overgrown by the goodthings of this life as they are termed: then you would see her asshe is, and know whether she has one shape only or many, or what hernature is. Of her affections and of the forms which she takes in thispresent life I think that we have now said enough. True, he replied. And thus, I said, we have fulfilled the conditions of the argument;we have not introduced the rewards and glories of justice, which,as you were saying, are to be found in Homer and Hesiod; but justicein her own nature has been shown to be best for the soul in her ownnature. Let a man do what is just, whether he have the ring of Gygesor not, and even if in addition to the ring of Gyges he put on thehelmet of Hades. Very true. And now, Glaucon, there will be no harm in further enumerating howmany and how great are the rewards which justice and the other virtuesprocure to the soul from gods and men, both in life and after death. @@ -3912,87 +3913,87 @@ Certainly. Then this must be our notion of the just man, that even when he isin Yes, he said; if he is like God he will surely not be neglected byhim. And of the unjust may not the opposite be supposed? Certainly. Such, then, are the palms of victory which the gods give the just?" "Summary: The text discusses the nature of justice and its rewards both in life and after death. Narrative arc: Philosophical argument -Enunciation: Dialog between two characters -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Philosophical argument -Literary movement: Platonism +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Glaucon, Socrates -Time setting: Contemporary -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "What's the use of being just?"" ""There's a reward."" ""And what is it?"" ""The reward of justice is that you'll be happy."" Glaucon frowned, then said: """"That doesn't sound like your usual answer."""" It's not,"" I said. ""But he had to give it. Now it's my turn to ask the questions."""" Tell me this,"" I said, ""suppose there were no gods, and suppose everything bad happened to you in life, but after you died you went to Hades and were happy forever, would you be just?"""" He looked at me with his strange eyes for a long time before he spoke. """"I'm sure I don't know. Why don't you answer the question?"""" Because it's not my question,"" I said. ""It's yours, remember? Anyway, if there were no gods, and if you could do anything you wanted, and you still chose to be just, would you expect any reward from doing so?"""" You're going too fast,"" he said. ""I can only tell you what I think. If there were no gods, and if you could do anything you wanted, and you still chose to be just, then nothing would happen to you. In fact, it would be useless to be just."""" I nodded. """"Do you mean you couldn't get away with injustice?"""" I didn't say that,"" he said. ""I meant that it wouldn't matter whether you were just or unjust. Nothing would come from it."""" He frowned. """"You're confusing me,"""" he said. """"Let's go back. Let's assume there are gods, and let's assume that when you die you go to Hades or someplace like it, and let's assume that you suffer for your injustices during your life, and let's also assume that you're rewarded for your justice. Is that fair?"""" No,"" I said. ""It's horrible. It's a form of torture."" He raised an eyebrow. """"Then why would you want it?"""" I'd want it if it was justice,"" I said. ""If it was right."""" But it isn't right,"" he said. ""It's revenge. It's vindictiveness."""" Maybe,"" I said. ""But let's go on. Let's assume you're dead, and you've been punished for your injustices. Is that enough? Do you really believe it makes up for the suffering you caused others while you lived?"""" Of course it does,"" he said. ""It balances things out."""" So you don't have to be just in life?"" I said. ""As long as you pay for your injustices later, you can do whatever you want now?"""" Yes!"" he said. ""Why shouldn't I? Nobody else will get away with their injustices."""" That's all you care about?"" I said. ""Isn't it enough to know that you did wrong? Isn't that punishment enough?"""" " +Time setting: 1950s +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "Yes, it's got to be a crime that hurts you inside. A man who just takes money out of your pocket isn't really hurting you, not deep down. He's only taking from you what's outside and he doesn't change anything important in you. No, you've got to take something away from a man, something he needs and wants; then you're getting at the real inside of him. You can tell by the way he starts to squirm when you get near his insides."""" Glaucon was still a little bewildered. He couldn't see where all this was leading, but he had been conditioned to accept Socrates' logic on faith, so he waited patiently for the next step. Then Socrates went right at him again: """"You understand what I mean by justice?"""" Yes."" All right. Now imagine that you could kill your enemies or hurt them any way you wanted to, without having to worry about being punished yourself. Wouldn't you do it?"""" Hell, yes!"" What if you were in charge of a prison and you knew how to torture people in such a way that they would talk fast enough to save their lives. Wouldn't you use that knowledge to make sure the criminals got exactly what they deserved?"" Sure, why not!"""" Suppose you owned a company and you knew how to manufacture defective products that would kill a lot of innocent people. Wouldn't you do it if you thought it might destroy your competitors?"" If I had to, sure. Business is business."" Well, suppose you found out that a lot of people were using certain kinds of drugs that made them do stupid things and maybe even killed them, and you knew how to lace those drugs with an ingredient that would make the users sterile and unable to have children. Wouldn't you do it to cut down on overpopulation?"" I'd sure like to try it!"" Then suppose you discovered that certain children were born with a gene that was going to make them become insane killers as adults. And suppose you found out how to identify these children and perform a simple operation on them that would prevent them from ever reproducing their kind. Wouldn't you do it if you thought it might save the world from war and insanity?"""" I don't know,"" Glaucon said slowly. ""I'm not so sure. It sounds pretty harsh, Socrates. Cruel and unusual punishment. It seems to me there has to be some other way."""" That's what most people think,"" Socrates agreed. ""But let's say you had a chance to find out whether the world would be better off if those children never existed. Suppose you could go back into time and eliminate the parents of these insane killers before they ever conceived their children. Wouldn't you do it?"""" I don't know,"" Glaucon repeated. ""That's a terrible responsibility."""" But that's what justice is all about, my friend,"" Socrates said. ""It's looking ahead and seeing what needs to be done and doing it, no matter what the cost to you personally. Justice is knowing what must be done and doing it anyway, even though everybody else says you're wrong. " 154 154 "That is my conviction. And what do they receive of men? Look at things as they really are,and you will see that the clever unjust are in the case of runners,who run well from the starting-place to the goal but not back againfrom the goal: they go off at a great pace, but in the end only lookfoolish, slinking away with their ears draggling on their shoulders,and without a crown; but the true runner comes to the finish and receivesthe prize and is crowned. And this is the way with the just; he whoendures to the end of every action and occasion of his entire lifehas a good report and carries off the prize which men have to bestow. True. And now you must allow me to repeat of the just the blessings whichyou were attributing to the fortunate unjust. I shall say of them,what you were saying of the others, that as they grow older, theybecome rulers in their own city if they care to be; they marry whomthey like and give in marriage to whom they will; all that you saidof the others I now say of these. And, on the other hand, of the unjustI say that the greater number, even though they escape in their youth,are found out at last and look foolish at the end of their course,and when they come to be old and miserable are flouted alike by strangerand citizen; they are beaten and then come those things unfit forears polite, as you truly term them; they will be racked and havetheir eyes burned out, as you were saying. And you may suppose thatI have repeated the remainder of your tale of horrors. But will youlet me assume, without reciting them, that these things are true? Certainly, he said, what you say is true. These, then, are the prizes and rewards and gifts which are bestowedupon the just by gods and men in this present life, in addition tothe other good things which justice of herself provides. Yes, he said; and they are fair and lasting. And yet, I said, all these are as nothing, either in number or greatnessin comparison with those other recompenses which await both just andunjust after death. And you ought to hear them, and then both justand unjust will have received from us a full payment of the debt whichthe argument owes to them. Speak, he said; there are few things which I would more gladly hear. Socrates" "Summary: The text discusses the rewards and punishments that just and unjust individuals receive in this life and in the afterlife. -Enunciation: Dialog -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Conversation/dialogue -Literary movement: Platonism +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Socrates Fuzzy place: Unnamed city -Diegetic time: A few minutes" Ei oikein tiennyt. Sanoo, ett hn en minua eik muitakaan pahastunut koskaan siihen asti kun meit ensi kerran tavattiin ja mink ei en ole seurannut. Jos joku aikaan saisin tll hnest tiedon, niin olisi siin minun aika ottaa tm mies tnne omaksi kutsuani. Tulee toki joskus asumaan kaupunkiin mutta vakaasti sen vaan sanotaan; ja hn ei myskn itse sit suotta kielt, vaan kertoo, ett on niin hyvin varustettu ja toimeentulonsa niin turvattu, ett juuri tarvitsee hnet kaupungissa olla. Mutta entisill tavoin, kuten sanot, hn kierteli maailmaa koko elonsa ajaksi? Niin. Sitten minun sain hnest seuraavan kuvauksen: kuinka nuorena hn oli vapauttanut jonkun hyvn ihmisen orjat, jotka olivat hnen salaisesti maksaneet vapaiksi; silloin hn oli ollut yhteydessi heidn kanssansa ja heidn joutuneensa karkuretkelle Egeanmeren rannoille, miss he olivat luoneet itselleen laivan, jonka miehistn ne olivat itsekin. He olivat siell joutuneet merirosvovallan alle ja olleet siell pidetyt nelj vuotta. Sen jlkeen he olivat palaamassa kotimaahansa, kun ne pakenemaan ryhtyvt heidn hnt vastaan lhdettneet perill, joita he olivat viel saaneet vankilasta vapauduttuaan. Niden kaltaisten tapausten aikana ne olivat usein suistumassa salakohtiin ja tienoilla olleet ruumiita, jotka he olivat sotien seurauksena haudanneet maahan, ja sielt olivat ottaneet esiin taas haudanavulla rahoja ja muuta valoa arvoista. Koska nill oli heille tarpeellista ja koska se oli heidn kaikki koko ajan krsimns, niin he olivat vakiinnuttaneet siin menon joka tapauksessa. Tm ihminen kertoi kuitenkin, ett jos ei olisi ollut heidn kanssaan, niin olisi hnen elonsa ollut samanlaiseksi. Ja hn sanoi, ettei siin tapauksessa hn olisi edes krsinyt koko aikaa. Min kysyin: Mink tyttmn hn on elnyt sitten? Hn sanoi: Enemmn tai vhemmn niin kuin me kaikki. Saattoipa hn tehd mit tahansa, niin tuli tll tai tuolla joku asia, joka loi hnelle odotuksia ja toivoja, jolloin hn sai uutta energiaa ja jatkoi sit siin. Niinp kuluu meidn elmsme koko ajan. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "Just men are happy and prosperous; unjust men miserable and wretched. In the next world, however, the situation is reversed. The just man suffers and is punished, while the unjust man lives in luxury and is rewarded."""" Is that so?"" said the detective. ""I'm a just man myself, and I've had about all the happiness I can stand. If you think I'm going to go on being just, with nothing but misery for my reward, you've got another guess coming!"""" Socrates grinned evilly. """"You can't help yourself, you know,"""" he said. """"The gods see to it that justice triumphs over injustice, whether we like it or not."""" Then let 'em try it!"" snarled the detective. ""I'll show them whether I'm going to be just or not!"" He took out his gun. Socrates raised his eyebrows. Well, well,"" he said. ""That's progress, at least. Last time you tried to strangle me."""" The detective glanced down at his hand. """"Gosh,"""" he said. """"I don't know how I did that."""" It's hard to explain,"" said Socrates. ""But don't worry about it. I'm sure it won't happen again."""" With that, the detective put his gun back into his pocket and turned away. And what were the results of his investigation?"" asked Crito. Nothing much,"" said Socrates. ""He went around the city asking everyone if they'd seen a certain woman. When they said no, he hit them over the head with his club, until they couldn't see anymore. Of course, no one admitted they'd seen her after that. Then he came back and told me that he was going home, because he had a lot of work to do. And then, I suppose, he went to bed."""" A strange young man,"" said Crito. ""And dangerous."" Yes,"" said Socrates. ""It's really too bad that he can't be cured. " 155 155 Well, I said, I will tell you a tale; not one of the tales which Odysseustells to the hero Alcinous, yet this too is a tale of a hero, Er theson of Armenius, a Pamphylian by birth. He was slain in battle, andten days afterwards, when the bodies of the dead were taken up alreadyin a state of corruption, his body was found unaffected by decay,and carried away home to be buried. And on the twelfth day, as hewas lying on the funeral pile, he returned to life and told them whathe had seen in the other world. He said that when his soul left thebody he went on a journey with a great company, and that they cameto a mysterious place at which there were two openings in the earth;they were near together, and over against them were two other openingsin the heaven above. In the intermediate space there were judges seated,who commanded the just, after they had given judgment on them andhad bound their sentences in front of them, to ascend by the heavenlyway on the right hand; and in like manner the unjust were bidden bythem to descend by the lower way on the left hand; these also borethe symbols of their deeds, but fastened on their backs. He drew near,and they told him that he was to be the messenger who would carrythe report of the other world to men, and they bade him hear and seeall that was to be heard and seen in that place. Then he beheld andsaw on one side the souls departing at either opening of heaven andearth when sentence had been given on them; and at the two other openingsother souls, some ascending out of the earth dusty and worn with travel,some descending out of heaven clean and bright. And arriving everand anon they seemed to have come from a long journey, and they wentforth with gladness into the meadow, where they encamped as at a festival;and those who knew one another embraced and conversed, the souls whichcame from earth curiously enquiring about the things above, and thesouls which came from heaven about the things beneath. And they toldone another of what had happened by the way, those from below weepingand sorrowing at the remembrance of the things which they had enduredand seen in their journey beneath the earth (now the journey lasteda thousand years), while those from above were describing heavenlydelights and visions of inconceivable beauty. The Story, Glaucon,would take too long to tell; but the sum was this: --He said thatfor every wrong which they had done to any one they suffered tenfold;or once in a hundred years --such being reckoned to be the lengthof man's life, and the penalty being thus paid ten times in a thousandyears. If, for example, there were any who had been the cause of manydeaths, or had betrayed or enslaved cities or armies, or been guiltyof any other evil behaviour, for each and all of their offences theyreceived punishment ten times over, and the rewards of beneficenceand justice and holiness were in the same proportion. I need hardlyrepeat what he said concerning young children dying almost as soonas they were born. Of piety and impiety to gods and parents, and ofmurderers, there were retributions other and greater far which hedescribed. He mentioned that he was present when one of the spiritsasked another, 'Where is Ardiaeus the Great?' (Now this Ardiaeus liveda thousand years before the time of Er: he had been the tyrant ofsome city of Pamphylia, and had murdered his aged father and his elderbrother, and was said to have committed many other abominable crimes.)The answer of the other spirit was: 'He comes not hither and willnever come. And this,' said he, 'was one of the dreadful sights whichwe ourselves witnessed. We were at the mouth of the cavern, and, havingcompleted all our experiences, were about to reascend, when of a suddenArdiaeus appeared and several others, most of whom were tyrants; andthere were also besides the tyrants private individuals who had beengreat criminals: they were just, as they fancied, about to returninto the upper world, but the mouth, instead of admitting them, gavea roar, whenever any of these incurable sinners or some one who hadnot been sufficiently punished tried to ascend; and then wild menof fiery aspect, who were standing by and heard the sound, seizedand carried them off; and Ardiaeus and others they bound head andfoot and hand, and threw them down and flayed them with scourges,and dragged them along the road at the side, carding them on thornslike wool, and declaring to the passers-by what were their crimes,and that they were being taken away to be cast into hell.' And ofall the many terrors which they had endured, he said that there wasnone like the terror which each of them felt at that moment, lestthey should hear the voice; and when there was silence, one by onethey ascended with exceeding joy. These, said Er, were the penaltiesand retributions, and there were blessings as great. "Summary: Er the Pamphylian tells a story about his journey to the afterlife where he witnesses the punishments and rewards of the souls in the other world. Trope: Afterlife, punishment and reward Narrative arc: Descriptive, no clear narrative arch -Enunciation: Third-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Narration -Literary movement: Platonic dialogue +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Er the Pamphylian Quoted character: Ardiaeus the tyrant -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s Fuzzy place: The afterlife -Diegetic time: A few minutes" The first of these was a sort of small house, the door of which he found open; and when he had gone inside and looked about him he saw something that caused him to cry aloud in terror. For there was a huge cauldron over a fire, and into this were being hurled all sorts of people, men and women and children, some alive and others already dead, who were being boiled in their blood. And Er the Pamphylian, seeing Ardiaeus the tyrant among them, cried out: 'What is the meaning of this? What terrible fate has befallen me that I should find myself here with such as this?' Whereupon an old man said to him: 'You shall presently learn the truth of what you see, if you can answer my questions.' 'Ask on,' said Er, 'and I will do my best to reply.' The old man said: 'In your lifetime did you ever meet any of the souls who have now been brought here?' 'Yes,' said Er, 'I know many of them.' 'And are any of them just?' 'A few,' said Er. 'And are any of them unjust?' 'Many,' said Er. 'Then tell me this,' said the old man: 'are not the latter punished and the former rewarded?' 'Certainly they are,' said Er. 'And where are they being punished or rewarded?' 'In a place called Hell,' said Er. 'But how,' said the old man, 'can a soul be punished in Hell after it has ceased to exist?' 'Why,' said Er, 'you yourself told me a moment ago that all those whom I see here are souls!' 'Indeed I did,' said the old man, 'but they are not the souls of men, but of other creatures which are akin to us in their wickedness. But now answer me one more question. Are there not punishments for the unjust and rewards for the just in the next world also?'' 'Of course there are,' said Er. 'Then why is it that these souls are here instead of there?' 'Because,' said Er, 'they are neither yet wholly just nor yet wholly unjust.' 'And where then,' said the old man, 'will they go when they have paid their penalty here?' 'They will return to earth again,' said Er, 'to take their bodies back and live their lives once more.' 'Do you mean to say,' said the old man, 'that they will be born again as human beings?' 'Certainly they will,' said Er. 'And is there no remedy for their wrongdoing?' 'No,' said Er, 'there is none.' 'It seems then,' said the old man, 'that the greatest punishment is the one which awaits them after death.' 'Perhaps it is so,' said Er, 'but I cannot tell you; for no one can tell anything about things that lie beyond his ken.' 'That is true enough,' said the old man. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" Er the Pamphylian had come up from below and was standing in front of us, shaking his head. I said: “I can’t make it out either, sir.” “Listen,” he said, “and you’ll find out.” He took a deep breath and began. “I’m Er the Pamphylian. There’s no need to ask how old I am; I know that myself. Once I was a man like you, but then I died. When I got to Hades I found Ardiaeus the tyrant and Charon ferrying him across the river Styx, and so I went up and asked why he was going to the upper world after death. ‘What do you want with me?’ he says. ‘Nothing,’ I say. ‘It’s just curiosity makes me ask.’ ‘Well,’ he says, ‘it was curiosity made me kill all those people and get myself into this mess. So it serves me right.’ “‘You’re quite right,’ I say, ‘but tell me, what are they doing there?’ “‘Those? They’re being punished for their sins. Listen, if you want to know everything, I’ll tell you.’ “So he told me, and I’ve come up here to tell you. In the first place, there are three ways in which souls can be sent down to Hades. The first is when their bodies die naturally, and then they have to pay off any debts they may have contracted while they were alive. If they haven’t contracted any debts, they just sit around, or else go on about their business, whatever that happens to be. The second way is when a soul is killed by another soul who gets a body as the price of murder. That’s because it doesn’t matter whether a soul kills a soul or a body kills a body; if you kill someone, you owe a debt to whoever has to take over your victim’s body. The third way is if a soul uses its own body to commit a crime, and is killed by its victim or by the police or some other official. Then it will be punished until it pays off its debt; but if it hasn’t committed any crimes, it just sits around or goes on about its business. “All the rest are being punished for their sins. If you don’t believe me, follow me and see for yourself. Come along.” And so we followed him. It wasn’t far, and before long we came to a doorway. We went inside. 156 156 Now when the spirits which were in the meadow had tarried seven days,on the eighth they were obliged to proceed on their journey, and,on the fourth day after, he said that they came to a place where theycould see from above a line of light, straight as a column, extendingright through the whole heaven and through the earth, in colour resemblingthe rainbow, only brighter and purer; another day's journey broughtthem to the place, and there, in the midst of the light, they sawthe ends of the chains of heaven let down from above: for this lightis the belt of heaven, and holds together the circle of the universe,like the under-girders of a trireme. From these ends is extended thespindle of Necessity, on which all the revolutions turn. The shaftand hook of this spindle are made of steel, and the whorl is madepartly of steel and also partly of other materials. Now the whorlis in form like the whorl used on earth; and the description of itimplied that there is one large hollow whorl which is quite scoopedout, and into this is fitted another lesser one, and another, andanother, and four others, making eight in all, like vessels whichfit into one another; the whorls show their edges on the upper side,and on their lower side all together form one continuous whorl. Thisis pierced by the spindle, which is driven home through the centreof the eighth. The first and outermost whorl has the rim broadest,and the seven inner whorls are narrower, in the following proportions--the sixth is next to the first in size, the fourth next to the sixth;then comes the eighth; the seventh is fifth, the fifth is sixth, thethird is seventh, last and eighth comes the second. The largest (offixed stars) is spangled, and the seventh (or sun) is brightest; theeighth (or moon) coloured by the reflected light of the seventh; thesecond and fifth (Saturn and Mercury) are in colour like one another,and yellower than the preceding; the third (Venus) has the whitestlight; the fourth (Mars) is reddish; the sixth (Jupiter) is in whitenesssecond. Now the whole spindle has the same motion; but, as the wholerevolves in one direction, the seven inner circles move slowly inthe other, and of these the swiftest is the eighth; next in swiftnessare the seventh, sixth, and fifth, which move together; third in swiftnessappeared to move according to the law of this reversed motion thefourth; the third appeared fourth and the second fifth. The spindleturns on the knees of Necessity; and on the upper surface of eachcircle is a siren, who goes round with them, hymning a single toneor note. The eight together form one harmony; and round about, atequal intervals, there is another band, three in number, each sittingupon her throne: these are the Fates, daughters of Necessity, whoare clothed in white robes and have chaplets upon their heads, Lachesisand Clotho and Atropos, who accompany with their voices the harmonyof the sirens --Lachesis singing of the past, Clotho of the present,Atropos of the future; Clotho from time to time assisting with a touchof her right hand the revolution of the outer circle of the whorlor spindle, and Atropos with her left hand touching and guiding theinner ones, and Lachesis laying hold of either in turn, first withone hand and then with the other. "Summary: The text describes the journey of spirits and their encounter with a light, chains, and a spindle that holds together the universe. Narrative arc: Descriptive -Enunciation: Third-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Description -Literary movement: Neoclassicism +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Spirits, Necessity, sirens, Fates Absolute place: A clubhouse in Los Angeles Fuzzy place: Meadow, place with the light, place with the chains and spindle -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "The spirits of the various kinds who were together on this journey had got up a lively argument about their several conditions, and all seemed to agree that it was an unsatisfactory state. The earth-spirits thought their lot the best; they could wander at will through the meadow, and have the pleasure of seeing the sun rise or set, or watching the clouds go by. The spirits from the place with the light said they lived in perpetual day, but that the light was so strong it blinded them, and they suffered from intense headaches. They also complained that there was no shade anywhere; nothing to give relief to the eyes. Necessity,"" explained one of these spirits, ""was careless about our welfare. She threw us into the world without any consideration whatever. We are all alone here."""" Oh, you should see the clubhouse,"" cried a spirit from the place with the chains and the spindle. """"You would be surprised to find how jolly we are when we get together. There is always music, and the food is good. Sometimes the sirens come over to visit us, and then we dance until morning."""" Then another spirit spoke up: Do not forget the Fates. We have seen them dancing around the spindle. They are very pretty."" " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" The spirits had to make a journey, from the place where they were to another place. They did not like the trip; it was very unpleasant. It was dark and cold in the meadow, and in their flight they bumped against trees, and tripped over roots and stones, and got tangled up in briars. And then suddenly there was a great light before them. “Who’s that?” said Necessity. “We don’t want any interference here,” said one of the sirens. “Go away,” said Fates, “we’ve come to take these people to their doom.” “And who might you be?” asked Necessity. “We are the Fates,” said Fates. “We are Necessity,” said Necessity. “If you are the Fates, I am Necessity,” said Necessity, “and if you are Necessity, I’m Necessity too. In fact we are all Necessity. You can see for yourself how necessary we are.” “That may be,” said Fates, “but you haven’t answered my question. Who are you?” “Why, who do you think we are?” said Necessity. “I’ll tell you who we are. We’re Necessity. Now, get out of our way or we’ll cut your throats.” “Oh, no, you won’t!” said Necessity. “You leave us alone, or we’ll put you in jail!” The Fates looked at each other and laughed. Then they seized Necessity by the feet and began to drag her along. She kicked and struggled and bit, but it was no use; she had to go. And as they dragged her along they sang: “Oh, Necessity! Oh, Necessity! Go on your way, oh, Necessity! Go on your way, oh, Necessity! For the Fates have taken thee and put thee in the chair of state, Where you must sit forever, though you scream and shout and hate, Till you learn to understand that what you cannot avoid you must accept, Though you try to change it with a million schemes and subtle plots, There’s a reason for everything and every little jot and tittle That will show you why things happen just the way they ought to, So go on your way, oh, Necessity!” At this the Fates laughed again, and tied Necessity down in a big chair. They took out some knitting needles and went on with their work. As the Fates knitted they sang: “Three is the magic number, the number of the triangle, The number of the spindle, the number of the chain. Three is the magic number, sing out a song of gladness, For three is the magic number of the children’s playground.” And as the last note died away the needle-work stopped. They had finished, and a great sigh seemed to pass through the room. 157 157 When Er and the spirits arrived, their duty was to go at once to Lachesis;but first of all there came a prophet who arranged them in order;then he took from the knees of Lachesis lots and samples of lives,and having mounted a high pulpit, spoke as follows: 'Hear the wordof Lachesis, the daughter of Necessity. Mortal souls, behold a newcycle of life and mortality. Your genius will not be allotted to you,but you choose your genius; and let him who draws the first lot havethe first choice, and the life which he chooses shall be his destiny.Virtue is free, and as a man honours or dishonours her he will havemore or less of her; the responsibility is with the chooser --Godis justified.' When the Interpreter had thus spoken he scattered lotsindifferently among them all, and each of them took up the lot whichfell near him, all but Er himself (he was not allowed), and each ashe took his lot perceived the number which he had obtained. Then theInterpreter placed on the ground before them the samples of lives;and there were many more lives than the souls present, and they wereof all sorts. There were lives of every animal and of man in everycondition. And there were tyrannies among them, some lasting out thetyrant's life, others which broke off in the middle and came to anend in poverty and exile and beggary; and there were lives of famousmen, some who were famous for their form and beauty as well as fortheir strength and success in games, or, again, for their birth andthe qualities of their ancestors; and some who were the reverse offamous for the opposite qualities. And of women likewise; there wasnot, however, any definite character them, because the soul, whenchoosing a new life, must of necessity become different. But therewas every other quality, and the all mingled with one another, andalso with elements of wealth and poverty, and disease and health;and there were mean states also. And here, my dear Glaucon, is thesupreme peril of our human state; and therefore the utmost care shouldbe taken. Let each one of us leave every other kind of knowledge andseek and follow one thing only, if peradventure he may be able tolearn and may find some one who will make him able to learn and discernbetween good and evil, and so to choose always and everywhere thebetter life as he has opportunity. He should consider the bearingof all these things which have been mentioned severally and collectivelyupon virtue; he should know what the effect of beauty is when combinedwith poverty or wealth in a particular soul, and what are the goodand evil consequences of noble and humble birth, of private and publicstation, of strength and weakness, of cleverness and dullness, andof all the soul, and the operation of them when conjoined; he willthen look at the nature of the soul, and from the consideration ofall these qualities he will be able to determine which is the betterand which is the worse; and so he will choose, giving the name ofevil to the life which will make his soul more unjust, and good tothe life which will make his soul more just; all else he will disregard.For we have seen and know that this is the best choice both in lifeand after death. A man must take with him into the world below anadamantine faith in truth and right, that there too he may be undazzledby the desire of wealth or the other allurements of evil, lest, comingupon tyrannies and similar villainies, he do irremediable wrongs toothers and suffer yet worse himself; but let him know how to choosethe mean and avoid the extremes on either side, as far as possible,not only in this life but in all that which is to come. For this isthe way of happiness. "Summary: Er and the spirits arrive at Lachesis to choose their lives, guided by a prophet who speaks about the choice between virtue and evil. Trope: The choice between good and evil Narrative arc: Philosophical reflection on the choice between virtue and vice -Enunciation: Third-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Speech or sermon -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: Er, the spirits, Lachesis, the prophet Fuzzy place: Unnamed location where Lachesis and the prophet speak -Diegetic time: A few minutes" But the spirits had now arrived at Lachesis, where stood a throne of gold. On this they sat, and held up their hands towards Er. He went to them and said: 'Whither are you going, justly or unjustly, armed with such a mighty host, which will fulfil in all things the command of the father?' They replied: 'We are going, as the god commanded us, to bring before him each soul separately, in order that he may do with her what is right.' Then Er led the way, and the souls of the righteous went first into the inner circle, which was set apart for them by a fence of gold; but when the other souls, which were not without fault, came to the place where the two roads divided, there stood up before them two minstrels sitting under a pillar. And it seemed to them that the souls which followed Er drew near the pillar and wept, while those which were yet without drank and made merry. Then one of the singers addressed them, saying: 'Ye souls of men whom God hath made just after toiling in an unrighteous life, wherefore do ye make lamentation and pity, instead of thanking the Lord who hath saved you from the punishment deserved by your wickedness?' And the other singer made answer and said: 'Speak to them, prophet, of the things which wait them, that they may be encouraged.' Then the first singer spake again, saying: 'Ye have lived amongst men a life which, through no fault of yours, has been in vice and righteousness, but now, as right and justice require, at the bidding of God, you must pass into another abode. For as the bodily form returns to the earth, even so the mortal soul departs to the underworld; but the divine part of man, which is immortal, and without suffering change, and is called by the Hellenes intelligence, by the Barbarians spirit, awakens in heaven a better or worse fate, according to the life which it has lived, whether good or bad. Therefore, when a man dies, that which dwells in the world below, the wrathful and strong guardian of the law, sends forth his soul to travel with the genius which has ever been its guide, and orders it to return and give place to another soul which he has taken up. And the soul, when it is set free from the bonds of the body, is sent by Minos and Rhadamanthus, the judges of the dead, to wait in the meadow of Memory, from which it does not move. But after the heats of the day the soul is summoned back to judgment, and is taken up with her attendant genius, and passes over the river Acheron upon a heap of dead bodies. There also the soul must drink of the water, and shall not pass whither she would until she have drunk it. +Diegetic time: A few minutes" "Er hatte sich, wie es schien, erholt. Jetzt aber ging er mit festeren Schritten weiter und fhrte die Geister vor sich her in den Palast Lachesis. Dort befand sich ein Prophet, der unter dem Portale des Tempels sa und von einer reichverzierten Sule gesttzt auf seinem Thron sa. Dieser Mann war alt und sehr mager, sein Gesicht war traurig und wunderlich. Er hielt seine Brust mit beiden Hnden gepret und sprach: """"Die Gttinnen haben euch gerufen, denn sie wollen eure Leben zelebrieren!"""" Er stand auf, um ihnen entgegenzugehen, aber als er den jungen Mann erblickte, blieb er stehen und sagte: """"O unglcklicher, was fr ein Ungetum ist das? Ich bin der Prophet und ich habe recht, denn ich sehe dich so, wie du bist und nicht, wie du wrdest sein knnen. Dein Geburtstag hast du heute, und ich wei auch schon, welches Leben du nun auswhlen willst."""" Der alte Mann sprach feierlich weiter, aber in seiner Stimme schwang eine harte und bse Laune mit. """"Ich wei wohl, da du einen guten Menschen wren knntest, aber das ist dir gleichgltig, denn du liebst nur das Bse. Du wolltest immer frei sein und das ist dein groes Verbrechen. Ich aber kann dir sagen, da niemand freier ist als derjenige, der die Pflicht gegen sich selbst beobachtet. Frh dich deines Lebens und straf mich nicht, indem du ihn annehmest. Denn deine Wahl wird so arg sein, da du mehr Elend sehen wirst, als Freude. Es gibt viele Wege, die zu einem Ziele fhren, und es gibt viele Ziele, die durch denselben Weg erreicht werden knnen. Vom großen Tor gehen viele Pfade ab, und alle sind gleich lang, nur eine Strae ist gesegnet, die andere verflucht. Ein Junge wird ber den gefhrlichen Weg gehen und mssen alle seine Lieblinge sterben. Ein Mdchen wird glcklich leben, aber ihre Mutter sterben. Einer wird sich rasieren, aber das Haar wieder wachsen. Einer wird zur Hochzeit kommen und sein Herz versprgen, aber dann wird er eher sterben, als heimkehren. Wende dich nicht von mir, sonst wirst du alle diese Dinge erleben, und mehr noch!"""" Der Prophet schlo seinen Redeflu und setzte sich wieder auf seinen Thron, whrend die Gtter sich lustig ber ihn lachten. Da sagte der junge Mann: """"Weit ihr, Geister, was dieser Wahrsager hier von mir geredet hat?"""" Die Geister wurden ernsthaft und sagten: """"Wir wissen alles, was da gesagt wurde, aber wir wollen dir keine Antwort geben. Entschliee dich selbst, welches Leben du wahlen willst."""" Nun wollte der junge Mann nichts mehr wissen und rief: """"Bringen mich fort, ich habe genug gehrt"""", und nach wenigen Schritten waren sie schon auf der Strae, wo sie ihren Weg weitergingen. " 158 158 "And according to the report of the messenger from the other worldthis was what the prophet said at the time: 'Even for the last comer,if he chooses wisely and will live diligently, there is appointeda happy and not undesirable existence. Let not him who chooses firstbe careless, and let not the last despair.' And when he had spoken,he who had the first choice came forward and in a moment chose thegreatest tyranny; his mind having been darkened by folly and sensuality,he had not thought out the whole matter before he chose, and did notat first sight perceive that he was fated, among other evils, to devourhis own children. But when he had time to reflect, and saw what wasin the lot, he began to beat his breast and lament over his choice,forgetting the proclamation of the prophet; for, instead of throwingthe blame of his misfortune on himself, he accused chance and thegods, and everything rather than himself. Now he was one of thosewho came from heaven, and in a former life had dwelt in a well-orderedState, but his virtue was a matter of habit only, and he had no philosophy.And it was true of others who were similarly overtaken, that the greaternumber of them came from heaven and therefore they had never beenschooled by trial, whereas the pilgrims who came from earth, havingthemselves suffered and seen others suffer, were not in a hurry tochoose. And owing to this inexperience of theirs, and also becausethe lot was a chance, many of the souls exchanged a good destiny foran evil or an evil for a good. For if a man had always on his arrivalin this world dedicated himself from the first to sound philosophy,and had been moderately fortunate in the number of the lot, he might,as the messenger reported, be happy here, and also his journey toanother life and return to this, instead of being rough and underground,would be smooth and heavenly. Most curious, he said, was the spectacle--sad and laughable and strange; for the choice of the souls was inmost cases based on their experience of a previous life. There hesaw the soul which had once been Orpheus choosing the life of a swanout of enmity to the race of women, hating to be born of a woman becausethey had been his murderers; he beheld also the soul of Thamyras choosingthe life of a nightingale; birds, on the other hand, like the swanand other musicians, wanting to be men. The soul which obtained thetwentieth lot chose the life of a lion, and this was the soul of Ajaxthe son of Telamon, who would not be a man, remembering the injusticewhich was done him the judgment about the arms. The next was Agamemnon,who took the life of an eagle, because, like Ajax, he hated humannature by reason of his sufferings. About the middle came the lotof Atalanta; she, seeing the great fame of an athlete, was unableto resist the temptation: and after her there followed the soul ofEpeus the son of Panopeus passing into the nature of a woman cunningin the arts; and far away among the last who chose, the soul of thejester Thersites was putting on the form of a monkey. There came alsothe soul of Odysseus having yet to make a choice, and his lot happenedto be the last of them all. Now the recollection of former tolls haddisenchanted him of ambition, and he went about for a considerabletime in search of the life of a private man who had no cares; he hadsome difficulty in finding this, which was lying about and had beenneglected by everybody else; and when he saw it, he said that he wouldhave done the had his lot been first instead of last, and that hewas delighted to have it. And not only did men pass into animals,but I must also mention that there were animals tame and wild whochanged into one another and into corresponding human natures --thegood into the gentle and the evil into the savage, in all sorts ofcombinations. All the souls had now chosen their lives, and they went in the orderof their choice to Lachesis, who sent with them the genius whom theyhad severally chosen, to be the guardian of their lives and the fulfillerof the choice: this genius led the souls first to Clotho, and drewthem within the revolution of the spindle impelled by her hand, thusratifying the destiny of each; and then, when they were fastened tothis, carried them to Atropos, who spun the threads and made themirreversible, whence without turning round they passed beneath thethrone of Necessity; and when they had all passed, they marched onin a scorching heat to the plain of Forgetfulness, which was a barrenwaste destitute of trees and verdure; and then towards evening theyencamped by the river of Unmindfulness, whose water no vessel canhold; of this they were all obliged to drink a certain quantity, andthose who were not saved by wisdom drank more than was necessary;and each one as he drank forgot all things. Now after they had goneto rest, about the middle of the night there was a thunderstorm andearthquake, and then in an instant they were driven upwards in allmanner of ways to their birth, like stars shooting. He himself washindered from drinking the water. But in what manner or by what meanshe returned to the body he could not say; only, in the morning, awakingsuddenly, he found himself lying on the pyre. And thus, Glaucon, the tale has been saved and has not perished, andwill save us if we are obedient to the word spoken; and we shall passsafely over the river of Forgetfulness and our soul will not be defiled.Wherefore my counsel is that we hold fast ever to the heavenly wayand follow after justice and virtue always, considering that the soulis immortal and able to endure every sort of good and every sort ofevil. Thus shall we live dear to one another and to the gods, bothwhile remaining here and when, like conquerors in the games who goround to gather gifts, we receive our reward. And it shall be wellwith us both in this life and in the pilgrimage of a thousand yearswhich we have been describing." "Summary: The text is a dialogue between two characters discussing the choices and destinies of souls in the afterlife. Trope: The afterlife, the choice of destiny Narrative arc: Reflective, philosophical -Enunciation: First-person narrative -Tone: Hardboiled +First-person narrative +Tone: Harsh, vivid Genre: Detective fiction/Mystery -Intertextuality: Greek Mythology -Speech standard: Informal, raw +Intertextuality: Hitchcock movies +Speech standard: Vulgar, highly informal Literary form: Dialogue -Literary movement: Platonic philosophy +Literary movement: Hardboiled Active character: The prophet, he who had the first choice, Ajax, Agamemnon, Atalanta, Epeus, Thersites, Odysseus -Time setting: Contemporary +Time setting: 1950s Absolute place: A clubhouse in Los Angeles Fuzzy place: The other world -Diegetic time: A few minutes" "If you want to know who has the best chance, look at him who is most in earnest when he says what he is going to do. He who does not take himself seriously will never be taken by his fellows very seriously. And he who knows how to take himself lightly can take others lightly. The first soul came to a high and arched gateway of ivory, and to it was affixed an inscription that read: 'To them that have chosen might.' And thereupon the prophet said: """"He who passes through this gate shall come into the house of great dreams and glory and all manner of visions."""" Then he that had the first choice cried out with a loud voice: 'Give me strength!' And he passed on into the other world."""" I am sorry,"" said the prophet, ""but he made the wrong choice. Had he but known that one may win more by patience than by strength, he would have been the greatest of men."""" Now the second soul came to the same archway, and again was there written above the portal: 'To them that have chosen might.' And he cried aloud: 'Give me wisdom!' And straightway the prophet replied: 'Wisdom is better than strength, for by wisdom you may conquer strength itself. Enter then into the other world!"""" And again he who had made the choice said: """"I am sorry."""" For he knew that if he had but asked for wisdom instead of strength, he would have been greater than all the rest. But he had asked for strength, and so it was given unto him, and because of his lack of wisdom he now stood in need of a guide."""" So it chanced that the third soul drew near. And lo! It was Ajax, son of Telamon, who bore upon his brow the Gorgon's head, and whose hand was ever upon his sword-hilt. And he spoke thus: 'Lead me, O prophet, lead me into the other world; for I will follow no longer!'"" And the prophet led him onward. Now the fourth soul came, and he also was a Greek. His name was Agamemnon, and he had borne the standard of the Achaeans against Troy. And as he saw Ajax before him he cried out: 'Hold! I also am a Greek and your comrade-in-arms. Lead me likewise into the other world!'"" And the prophet led him onward. Next came Atalanta, daughter of the king of Arcadia, who had run the races with the swiftest of men and won. And she spake: 'O prophet, lead me into the other world; for I desire to follow those who have gone before me!'"" Again did the prophet lead him on. Then came Epeus, the architect of the wooden horse, which was the ruin of Troy. And he said: 'Prophet, I too desire to go into the other world.'"" One after another they passed on, until twelve souls stood beneath the archway, each asking to be led into the other world. " +Diegetic time: A few minutes" “Perhaps so,” the prophet answered, and went on. “He who had the first choice took the other world to live in and this world to visit when he wished.” “That must have been Ajax,” I suggested. “Yes, it was,” said the prophet. “Why did he choose the other world?” “Because he didn’t like people,” said the prophet. “Well, I can’t say I blame him much for that. But what about the other fellow? That’s Agamemnon, isn’t it?” “Yes, it is.” “Why does he want to live here?” “Because he likes people,” said the prophet. “And Atalanta? Is she the third? She wouldn’t have anything to do with people when she was alive.” “That is true,” said the prophet. “But she expects to be able to change them when she gets the power.” “I see. And Epeus is the fourth. Why did he take the other world?” “He could think of nothing better to do,” said the prophet. “Thersites must be the fifth.” “Yes, it is.” “What put that big idea into his head?” “His size,” said the prophet. “Odysseus! He was my favorite hero when I was a boy. What made him choose the other world?” “To keep out of trouble,” said the prophet. “What’s he doing now?” “Trying to get back here.” “I wish him luck.” I turned to leave. “Just a minute, Mr. Malloy,” said the prophet. “Aren’t you going to make your choice?” “No,” I said. “I don’t want to be a prophet.” “You have to be something,” said the prophet. “You can’t stay here. You can go back to the other world or go on to hell.” “Oh, all right,” I said. “I’ll take hell. It sounds more comfortable than the other place.” The prophet sighed. “It is a very difficult job, being a prophet,” he said. “How do you mean?” I asked. “It’s just like being an artist,” he said. “You’ve got to work at it all the time. All day and every day you are making prophecies. If you let up for five minutes they will catch you napping and chuck you out.” “I don’t believe it,” I said. “It doesn’t sound as if it was worth it. Besides, I thought prophets were inspired by God.” “They are,” said the prophet. “But inspiration lasts only for a few moments, and after that you’re sunk without any help from anybody else. It’s just like being a musician. You’ve got to practice all the time to keep your fingers supple, and if you stop practising for five minutes you’re done for.