Plato’s Symposium vs Xenophon’s Symposium

          

  Plato’s Symposium has inspired many writers and artist into creating variations or inspired pieces from the Symposium including Xenophon’s Symposium. Plato’s version, compared with that of Xenophon’s and other Plato inspired written pieces, is still the best example of a masterpiece of this genre. It is written full of wit and humor but has a deep philosophical, often times, moral value.

            Plato’s depiction of events of the symposium created an arena of philosophical debate wherein all the aspects of love was tackled with utmost seriousness despite the atmosphere of humor and light teasing among the participants. The philosophical dialogue was universal and without prejudice. It can be said that Plato tried to achieve, and succeeded, to present all the aspects of love on an objective point of view. Further he extended such objectivity to the different issues or various preferences of almost all the people.

            In Phaedrus, Plato presented the love in context with that of the god Eros. Here he presented love in a most primitive form. That it is but natural for lovers to inspire awe and admiration form their beloved since this is the nature of the parentless and oldest of the gods Eros. His discussion about a man committing an un-glorious act in front of his beloved is the most shameful thing that can happen is all but natural. It is experienced by men in the past and the present. Phaedrus’ argument tried to explain this most primeval act from the context of a man’s perspective.

            Using another divine personage Aphrodite Urani, Pausanias discussed the natural tendency of finding love on adult male, one who is close to growing beard. Here Plato stressed that only if the boy’s main objective is to become wise and virtuous can such a relationship between man and boy can be accepted as something decent.

            In Eryximachus, Plato gave a very ambiguous and yet universal depiction of love. Though somewhat amusing and perplexing, Eryximachus’ statement that love “governs” medicine, etc and “regulates” hot and cold, etc could be nothing more than the present day expression that love makes the world go round. Despite such lightness and vagueness, it can be said that here Plato emphsized that love can be a different thing to different people and they can all be real, if it is real enough for the person.

            Aristophanes’ amusing story of the three sexes, the all male, all female and the hermaphrodite, who tried to climb the heights of heaven but was blasted by Zeus and was cut in half tried to explain the age old sentiment of lovers looking and finding their other half. The time this was written, such observation can be seen as a form of reverence to the supreme god Zeus and at the same time an attempt to explain the feelings of love. Though amusing today, it can be said that Plato’s Aristophanes is the best explanation about love since it explains the feelings and yet dismisses the mystery behind it by making the god Zeus the one responsible for everything.

            If Aristophanes had a religious theme, Agathon’s is nothing more than simply saying love is romance. His poetic view implied that such love, love for the sake of love, exists especially for the young ones who are just getting acquainted with life and love.

            Socrates’ idea on the matter of love is somewhat self serving although it is important to note that during that time, young boys pairing with old men is the norm. And yet despite the self serving philosophy, one cannot dismiss the fact that his is profound enough to warrant the debates about love which have come about since the time it was written. His theory that man ultimately desires immortality, which is the reason behind our instinct to breed is very insightful. About the insight on relationship with women, on giving birth to children ideas, Socrates’ philosophy may be self serving and yet realistic. Because it was the immortal Socrates who said the words about immortality, he was able prove himself right.

            Alcibiades’ humorous comparison of Socrates to the statue of Silenus and to the satyr Marsyas and then later on to the development of events wherein despite Alcibiades’ speech Socrates lies down with Agathon created a light scene of love unrequited. This added to the dimension of love and made it even more real for the reader. 

            Xenophon’s Symposium, though masterful is not as widely inspiring as that of Plato’s. The initial debate on what is vaulable on each of the members of the symposium added a distinct dimension to his Symposium. Callias stated that he makes people better by giving them money, Nicreratus valued his Homeric knowledge; Antisthenes finds morality in not having money and values his time with Socrates. Charmides is proud of his poverty while Socrates values his skills on being a pimp. Philippis, his humou, Lycon his son Autolycus while Autolycus his father. Hermogenes treasures his friends while Critobulus his good looks. All these showed the various aspects in ones life which one may find most pleasing and proud of.

            On the matter of love, Socrates’ puts value on the mind and on mental affection. Here he stated that love for the physical beauty has lead to many sinful ways while love for ones mind is something which can inspire one to do good, encourage one to pursue wisdom and create many valuable friendship along the way.

            The end of the discussion where in everyone left and went home to his wife or lovers evoked a very realistic scene. As with every gathering, no matter what the discussion is, everyone eventually goes back to his own life. Xenophon made a proper ending and the reader as part of the symposium also leaves the scene but enriched by the discussion.

            Comparing Plato’s Symposium with that of Xenophon’s one can say that the distiction lies in the presentation of every participant. Plato’s characters are more realistic and their arguments are more depth in terms of the theory on love. Though the characters have different opinion, and some of the opinions are less realistic than the others, the way Plato presented them made each one so real that the reader could actually feel that they are as real as the drunk old men discussing something at the bar. On a philosophical sense, this distinction provided a more convincing note to it. The idea of love for one’s mind and love for the physical beauty as presented by Plato encourages the reader to give the idea further consideration. Philosophically, it was presented in a very provocative way. Further, the pursuit of wisdom was elevated to a degree wherein it is above any physical love. It has its own merits and the merits, as argued and I agree, supercedes all other forms of love.

            A lot of things can be learned from the Symposium, both of Plato’s and of Xenophone’s. But the most important lesson is the importance of wisdom. As shown by both the Symposium, there are different ideas behind every action and there are different philosophies that drive a man. No one can actually say which is true and which is false, and it does not matter. The real misfortune is when one does not have any ideal or philosophy that motivates him. Further, Plato’s Symposium gave one insights about the different kinds of love which on further analysis made them all totally acceptable. For instance, it is easy to ridicule homosexual love but under the ideas presented by Socrates, such love can even be of the same value, if not greater than that of heterosexual love. Lastly, the presentation of Plato was so real that it prompts one to actually ask the same question about love. The depictions were so realistic that one can actually imagine being a part of the symposium and as such one cannot help but as what one would actually say about the discussion. As a whole, Plato’s Symposium provided greater philosophical insights than that of Xenophone’s.