Product Description

The Closing of the American Mind, a publishing phenomenon in hardcover, is now a paperback literary event. In this acclaimed number one national best-seller, one of our country's most distinguished political philosophers argues that the social/political crisis of 20th-century America is really an intellectual crisis. Allan Bloom's sweeping analysis is essential to understanding America today. It has fired the imagination of a public ripe for change. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (152)

Bloom on Target : Moral Relativism Experiment Fails
Allan Bloom's book is a classic read in that it clearly states the reality of change for the worse by the U.S. Culture in the last half of the 20th century. The conscious and unconscious thought process stating that "all truth is relative" fails on every front. I would finish this review by referencing a GREAT review on this book by Thomas West : [...] , and a GREAT article on Relativism and Tolerance by Larrey Anderson :[...] (I have re-read the book several times and the two articles too!).

Worth a Re-Read if you are to understand the last half of the 20th Century.
Once again, "marred by its biases"Publisher's Weekly "laments" this important book.

The same people who have dumbed down our education system are naturally offended by this revelatory book of "what's changed" and what you missed if you were schooled within the last few decades.

This is the book all should read to understand what was lost and to fuel our push for "change reversal."It's clear now that Americans are ready for it.The recent debate over school textbook content indicates that the dialogue has already begun.This book will add to your knowledge of what was lost when textbooks became primers for Liberal activism.

It isn't an easily accessible book for most readers, but could be the most important one to educate you on all that was sacrificed to the Liberal political agenda.

Naturally Liberals will not like the book, as it strikes their home-base. For instance, in a chapter on the German influence, you will learn that value relativism of Nietzsche was adopted, widely celebrated by the Left, and now dominants the national dialogue on everything from your child's education to national security.

Please read it loan it out to your friends and family. And let's continue the dialogue about textbook contents and about higher education and whether it should be a forum for political indoctrination, or an opportunity to better understand our culture as it used to be and how we we got where we are today.
.
(Rumor has it, by the way,that Nietzsche is now dead.)

The American Mind is Likely Closed By Now!
If, when this book was written back in the late 1980s the American mind was closing; it must surely be shut by now!With the advent of computer technology literacy and the appreciation of the arts have all plumeted.We hardly read books much anymore, let alone the Great Books and classics Mr. Bloom discusses here.

While this is a wordy, and even somewhat arrogant appraisal of our state of being, much of what Mr. Bloom says does hit the mark.The PC crowd will no doubt take offense at much that is said here.The fact remains however that when the American universities surrendered to the radicalism of the 60s they lost much of their Raison d'etre.The universities were the closest thing we had to a detached, intellectual mind set.They were our legacy of Western learning and knowledge.Once they gave in to popular sentiments and taste we as a society lost much of our inner soul, and whatever intelligensia we possessed.

Now we struggle to retain what litte we have left.While Bloom is very elitest in tone, he does make sense in a lot of his critiques.Democracy does not possess any great resvoir of detached intellectuals like an aristocracy or clergy.While many might think these are dated concepts, to have such groups promotes an intellectualism that we sadly lack now.Once a society reduces eveything to a common denominator there tends to be little left to challenge and excite the senses.We as a society have become a bunch of techy gnomes.We are affraid to do much of anything outside of the technology we now have.We lack resolve and creativity.We seek the computer to do everything for us now.

Bloom may upset a lot of people, but what he has to say about the decaying standards of our society are just as cogent today as they were 20 years ago.Perhaps even more so as many factors exist today that were only beginning to take place then.Many won't like to hear that just because they have an MBA does not mean they are educated persons!Bloom does not think that higher learning should be a place for people just interested in business careers.Two year colleges and special business schools can do that. The case is even worse today with Computer Science and their like!While a lot of his philosopical studies will be a hard read, those who persist shall be rewarded.America today is technologically advanced, but our literacy standards continue to decline.How much longer can we claim to be the center of the world if our own literacy continues to decline.

The old man wants you to get off his lawn
There reaches a point in many mens' lives when their trousers wander far north of their navels, when they become baffled by the latest music trends, and they become convinced that the youth are going to hell in a handbasket.

Most men spend their twilight years harassing a small circle of their close relatives and nursing home staff, keeping their crotchety thoughts safely contained. Mr. Bloom was allowed to go senile in public and wrote a book called the Closing of the American Mind.

It's hard to understand how a book so devoid of data or facts, so heavily constructed upon blanket statements and crude stereotypes could be taken so seriously. I almost mistook it for satire, but eventually realized that he was actually being sincere. Lo and behold, he really is using participation in the peace corps as evidence that America's youth (at least in the late 1980s) are morally and intellectually deficient. He really does seem to believe that an interest in other cultures and languages is a sign that the youth have lost their way. Etc. Etc. This is remarkable stuff. Why, it's almost quaint. It's certainly laughable.

Reading this book, I can't help but wonder if his reactions, his assessments of students weren't based upon their reactions to him, to his classes, and his increasingly antiquated and irrelevant field of philosophy that's been losing ground to science, to psychology, to the social sciences. Maybe the kids are all right after all. Maybe the old man's the one that's fallen behind.

A diagnosis of the listlessness and spiritual deformity of our society

This book, written more than 20 years ago, remains extremely relevant for today. The basic thesis of the book is that what happened in the 60s to the cultural and educational landscape (particularly in the universities) and has since then gathered pace, has undermined the foundations of American civilisation (and I would add Western Civilisation). But what is the problem. For Bloom it is the ideology of relativism - where there were once share values and mores, the only thing now shared by all is that "there is no enemy other than the man who is not open to everything. But when there are no shared goals or visions of the public good, is the social contract any longer possible?" Writing here from the UK, it is astonishing how successful the new ideology has been; thus here in the UK, all the major political parties (including the conservatives) buy into the ideology of the primacy of the individual's right to be whatever wants to be. Thus, all parties advance the most flaky notions of what the basic foundation stones of society are - the most obvious one is that the family has become well just whatever you want it to be, constituted by whoever, whether transient or permanent, who cares: lets call it family if the participants wish it to be so called. This is an excellent book and one wonders what additional barbs Bloom would have to make about the state of the culture more than 20 years. No doubt he would be as entertaining as ever.

What Bloom is really almost angry about is that the new relativism embracing an openness to all things inevitably leads to what the ancients called acidie - a kind of spiritual indifference to life or what Bloom refers to as listlessness or a deformity of the spirit. If all things have the same value, why seek and search for truth - why seek to live a virtuous life, why seek to learn from the wisdom of the ancients, Socrates, Plato, Artistotle, Aquinas etc - all those who have contributed so much to our understanding of what it means to be a human being. By contrast, for Bloom, "True openness means closedness to all the charms that make us comfortable with the present". What Bloom is getting at is the danger of a basic ideology which makes us crassly indifferent to the grandeur of being. And Bloom says something that will get people's hackles up: "Prejudices, strong prejudices, are visions about the way things are...The mind that has no prejudices at the outset is empty." But, the curious thing is that no one including our relativist political leaders really has no values. Thus, here in the UK, "tolerance" for all types of lifestyles has become the Great Value - it literally towers everything - thus a UK minister tells catholic schools that it must now give information about abortion facilities and their access and should provide information about sexual lifestyles in a non-judgemental value. But where is the philosophical basis for making this so called "tolerance" an overarching value? As Bloom notes "It is not the immortality of relativism that I find appalling. What is astonishing and degrading is the dogmatism with which we accept relativism, and our easygoing lack of concern about what that means for our lives".

Bloom's canvas is a large one - not just education but practically every foundation stone of life is examined, noting that "The dreariness of the family's spiritual landscape passes belief". But Bloom's primary focus is undoubtedly education. He notes that "the failure to read good books both enfeebles the vision and strengthens our most fatal tendency - the belief that the here and now is all there is" and "deprived of literary guidance, students no longer have any image of a perfect soul, and hence do not long to have one. They do not even image that is such a thing". . But for Bloom: "the substance of my being has been informed by the books I learned to care for"

I noted his comments on music with interest but did not feel he had much to contribute.

Bloom's most pointed comments are on eros and relationships, noting that "Students these days are pleasant, friendly, and if not great souled, at least not particularly mean-spirited. Their primary preoccupation is themselves, understood in the narrowest sense" - he notes later: that they are "flat-souled". He notes that students "can be anything they want to be, but they have no particular reason to want to be anything in particular". He notes that as sex has become "no big deal", it has also become passionless, trivialised, de-eroticised and demystified, leading to a "crippled eros". He laments the loss of modesty. But the key issue is provisionality in sexual relationships: "To strangers from another planet, what would be the most striking thing is that sexual passion no longer includes the illusion of eternity" and a young person "can now choose, but he finds he no longer has a sufficient motive for choice that is more than whim, that is binding". But Bloom is not just interested in the deterioration in sexual relationships but he notes the loss of symbolism for fathers: "There is nothing left of the reverence towards the father as the symbol of the divine on earth, the unquestioned bearer of authority". And Bloom notes the wreakage created by divorce: "The important lesson that the family taught was the existence of the only unbreakable bond, for better or for worse, between human beings". But, also the impetus for marriage has disappeared as men have their cake and eat it.

I am not at all qualified to give an opinion on his philosophical analysis of what is the causation of all this, particularly his analysis that the importation of German philosophy into a culture ill-suited to digest and understand it is the principal cause but I did find his comments on Locke and Rousseau to be both interesting and entertaining. But, I feel that he is right when he says "the novel aspect of the crisis of the West is that it is identical with a crisis of philosophy".

Bloom takes a big swipe at the ideology of "the self": "To sum up, the self is the modern substitute for the soul". He notes that "America has no-fault automobile accidents, no-fault divroces, and it is moving with the aid of modern philosophy towards no fault choice". But the so called "life-style" choice comes in for his greatest criticism: "lifestyle is so much freer, easier, more authentic and democratic. No attention ahs to be paid to content". Thus the word "lifestyle" becomes the democratic abstraction for justifying all sorts of hedonistic behaviour.

Democracy comes in for criticism and in this respect Bloom echoes CS Lewis. Democracy "causes a particular bent which, if not actively corrected, distorts the mind's vision" and "The deepest intellectual weakness of democracy is the lack of taste or gift for the theoretical life". He notes the use of "slogans" and the chasing after the "shiny new theory".

Bloom the reminds us of the fear of death and the relation to eternity and notes man's grandeur: "Man is the particular being that can know the universal, the temporal being that is aware of eternity, the part that can survey the whole, the effect that seeks the cause".

The sixties come in for particular attack, One comment I found most interesting was his noting that sacrificial morality "was not the morality that came into vogue in the sixties, which was an altogether more histrionic version of moral conduct". I was reminded of the attacks on Pope Pius XII which began in the sixties and continue unabated to this day. The fact that under Pope Pius XII's leadership, the Catholic Church managed to save about 800,000 Jews is regarded as not significant - rather Pope Pius XII is derided and regarded as shameful for not attacking Hitler and his regime publically from the balcony of St Peter's i.e. Pope Pius XII did not engage in moral histrionics, ergo he is not moral!

The University, as an institution, comes in for the greatest criticism - he deals with so many issues, grade inflation, the fragmentation of philosophy departments into specialism, preferences for certain sections of the community but generally one gets the impression that philosophers in universities no longer believe in living the Socratic examined life or at least have no passion for it. ... Read more

Product Description
Long regarded as the most accurate rendering of Plato's Republic that has yet been published, this widely acclaimed work is the first strictly literal translation of a timeless classic. This second edition includes a new introduction by Professor Bloom, whose careful translation and interpretation of The Republic was first published in 1968. In addition to the correct text itself there is also a rich and valuable essay--as well as indexes and a glossary of terms--which will better enable the readerto approach the heart of Plato's intention. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (41)

The Injustice of Not Reading
Plato's Republic is a book that shouldn't be taken lightly because if your not paying careful attention, you will get lost. The book at its' core is the answer to one of the most basic questions of human society: What is Justice? In this book, several Ancient Greek philosophers give it their best shot...with let's just say interesting results. Sure there are other intriguing discussions about forms of governance and class systems and structures, but everything leads back to the core of justice. Although this translation is quite good, I could've honestly done without the interpretive essay that makes up the books size. Inside this book are various ideas of justice, each both plausible on some level, but flawed in other aspects such is the nature of justice or any other human creation. This book should be read for its' great value in intellectual stimulation because not everything in life is concrete in form and black and white. Even though justice is subjective, not reading this book would be injustice.

Reason allows us to live for something
I read Plato's Republic for a graduate philosophy class. I paid close attention to Plato's thesis of courage in his Republic, which I expound below. I found G. M. A. Grubb's translation to be the best of several I read.

Plato's project in the Republic is to form the "perfect" society. "Reason allows us to live for something." Through reason we set goals and organize our lives around achieving goals. Plato argues that the government's duty to citizens is to provide justice, and educate citizens both men and women. The state's social structure stood for justice and was divided into three groups. Rulers- those trained to use reason and posses wisdom. Guardians/ Soldiers have courage/spirit. Artisans have moderation of appetites. Plato's ideal ruler, the "Philosopher King," should be 50 years old with 15 years of government experience and should have studied science and philosophy. The ruler must show a mastery of Arete = excellence vs. akrasia= weakening of will, or no self-control. The ruler should think logically not emotionally. In the Republic to insure excellent people Plato advocated selective breeding of excellent unmarried people who lived in communes, who did not own property.

Plato describes five types of government in the Republic:

1. Aristocracy- Plato considered this the best form of government; aristocracy embodies wisdom of the philosopher king.
2. Timocracy- military government embodies virtues of honor and courage.
3. Oligarchy- rule by a rich elite, their vice is greed, the rich get richer, the poor get poorer.
4. Democracy- mob rule, and chaos, it represents akrasia people are slaves of their desires and have little self-control.
5. Tyranny- this is the worst form of government. The vice is selfishness, one power crazed person in control.

Plato's purpose in the Republic is not to perfect the character of people as an end but only as a means to an end. Plato's aim has a definite effect on his definition of courage. I find this is especially the case when exploring his ideas on how to educate the Guardians of the city to act courageously. Plato's goal is to match a person's character disposition to a job they are naturally inclined to perform in the city. Once he [Plato] has introduced the city in 369 b-d, he immediately advances the thesis, which is to dominate the rest of the Republic, that the needs of its inhabitants can best be met if each person in it performs that single task, and that single task alone, for which he is naturally suited.

With this view of human nature in mind, in Plato's model society, he divides the citizens into three classes. Rulers from whom the "philosopher king," will be selected, Guardians who are soldiers to protect the state, and the rest of the citizens classified as Artisans This division of citizens precipitates a discussion by Plato on the four virtues that these citizens will bring to the state. In the history of philosophy this becomes known as the "four cardinal virtues"; wisdom, courage, moderation, and justice. With this introduction of courage as a virtue, Plato takes another crack at defining courage. What is also important to observe is that he introduces a new element, that of education, in his definition of courage that was absent from his early dialogue Laches.

Plato espouses the idea in the Republic that the Guardians need to possess certain natural qualities; such as strength, speed, and courage. It seems odd that Plato classifies courage as a natural quality possessed by certain people. This automatically presupposes that not all people can practice the virtue of courage. Plato's successor Aristotle, will argue against this notion in his EN. In addition, Plato argues that in order for people to be courageous they must also have an aggressive thumos [passion], which makes both people and animals fearless and determined. Plato fears that the Guardians could be susceptible to using their passion of aggressiveness against there own people. Therefore, he counsels that the Guardians who naturally possess aggressiveness have to also naturally possess the opposite characteristic of gentleness as well, so that their aggressiveness will only be used against the enemy and not their own citizenry.

This dialogue is significant in that it helps to flesh out Plato's notion of what ultimately makes a person courageous. First, Plato argues that the goal of education, which he compares to a sheepdog, is to watch over the Guardians; thus, with the proper education he believes the proper balance between exciting their aggressiveness and subduing it in the Guardians can be achieved. Second, Plato believes that if aggressiveness is properly excited by physical training, then the Guardian will be courageous. If overly excited they will be like a wild beast devoid of grace and will become ignorant. Finally, Plato argues in his education section of the Republic, that to counter the possibility of a Guardian developing an over excited passion of aggressiveness, it is necessary to teach the Guardians literature and music during the same time they undergo physical training.

Thus, Plato hopes this balanced approach to educating the Guardians will then lead to courage being a controlled and calm act of endurance in battle, instead of a foolhardy lust for blood letting and an emotional reaction to war. Not only does Plato spend a significant amount of time advocating for the tools necessary to subdue the passions of the Guardians in book three of the Republic, but another important point in Plato's philosophy to consider is that since he believes that a Guardian's aggressiveness is influenced by literature he is very concerned by what type of literature is taught to them as well. Plato is very concerned that the archetypical heroic warrior Achilles, as depicted in Homer's epic poem the Iliad along with those depicted in Greek tragedies performed on stage, are bad examples for the Guardians to emulate. Consequently, Plato advises that heroes of Greek literature should be depicted as thoughtfully courageous and in control of their anger and physically resilient warriors. Thus, Plato seems to be using the term andreia [courage] to cover (at the least) both courage proper, which can only exist in some kind of unity with the other virtues, and raw mettle or aggressiveness, which can exist in conjunction with various vices. Plato in book four of the Republic does move on from his study of thumos as the prime motivating force to act courageously, to actually defining the virtue of courage. Plato defines courage as a person's ability to subdue their aggressiveness by the orders of their reason in regards to what they should be fearful of regardless of their own feelings of pain or pleasure. Plato's expounded definition of the virtue of courage is that a courageous act is an amalgamation of a person's natural passion of aggressiveness and properly educated rational beliefs over what is worthy regarding the possibility of losing their life or limb over.

Great book, but the Kindle version is horrible
I have the 2nd edition in both book and Kindle form.I give the book form 5 stars; the Kindle version is horrible.You won't see this from the sample, but the index is completely useless - its simply a list of words with no hyperlinks.Additionally, none of the citations are present in the Kindle version, rendering it worthless for any serious study or using outlines.One wonders whether anyone at the publisher, Basic Books, bothered to read the Kindle version before releasing it.

Again, the book itself gets 5 stars, the Kindle version needs a lot of work before it's worth the money.

A book that is holy
Of all those who are today recognized as great philosophers, there may only be a few who merit the title in the true sense, while the others are perhaps more accurately commentators, essayists. Not to take anything away from any of the recognized greats - recognized as great for good reason - but with the true philosophers one comes across something different, and really more, than observation, invention, or sophistication. Instead, there is an extraordinary devotion to purity, above all, and to the stripping away of noise, excess, multiplicity, and all that the truth is buried beneath. The effect is not one of shock, or revelation, or elevated character, but of fulfillment and breathtaking beauty. Among this small circle are Plato, more recently Machiavelli, and more recently still Wittgenstein. One not only reads them at great gain, but re-reads them to discover new wonders each time. And among them, Plato is arguably without rival... and his Republic is, arguably, without end.

Beautiful, provocative, and potentially dangerous
First, a bit about "The Republic" itself.

Written in 380 BC, "The Republic" is one of Plato's best known, and most influential, works. It depicts a conversation between Socrates and several of his young followers about the nature of justice, political justice in particular, and what the ideal, perfectly just city or republic (the Greek word is *polis*, which invokes meanings of both community and political statehood) would actually look like.

In Socrates's view, the perfectly just polis would be founded on, and run according to, the dictates of reason. And reason, according to Socrates, dictates that for the polis to be truly just, it would need to be ruled by a philosopher-king (a man of spectacular intelligence, virtue, and vision), who, via the levers of state power and outrageous propaganda efforts, would control virtually every aspect of life within it for the common good. (In a word, the best way to describe Socrates's ideal political regime is totalitarian communism.) Thus, because family members tend to feel an allegiance to each other which sometimes conflicts with allegiance to the state, the family unit must be abolished. Private property must go. The idea that males and females are unequal in any respect must be crushed. Poetry, music, speech, and drama must be heavily censored so as to ensure they serve the state/common good. You get the picture.

In order to sell this to the masses, Plato famously proposes that a "noble lie" be perpetuated. That noble lie would be a "foundational myth", a comprehensive narrative which would make mere state action appear to be an expression of divine or cosmic right, and therefore, essentially unquestionable. From birth, citizens will be taught that the gods have mixed different proportions of gold, silver, or bronze into them. The rulers are gold people; that's why they rule. Common labourers are bronze people. In between are the silver people. And the gold people are the ones who can discern what type each person is; after they do so, each citizen will receive their proper job assignment according to how much of each metal they have.

What gives Socrates the right to recommend such drastic measures? Well, as he explains in the famous cave allegory, through reason, one can really come to know the Truth, capital T. Despite his protestations otherwise, Socrates obviously is a knower. That is, he knows what justice would look like: the ideal city he describes.

At least, that is the orthodox reading of this text. There is, as it happens, also an *unorthodox reading which requires mention here, because it is propounded in the interpretive essay included by translator Allan Bloom.

The orthodox reading takes Plato at face value: in the end, he views totalitarian communism (properly directed) as the most just regime. That's what he says, so that's what he means.

The unorthodox interpretation was developed by controversial political philosopher Leo Strauss, Bloom's mentor at the University of Chicago. According to Strauss, the great political texts tend to have a surface, or *exoteric*, meaning, but also a deeper, *esoteric* meaning inaccessible to all but the most sensitive, insightful, and virtuous readers. So in this case, viewing Socrates as a totalitarian communist is the result of a merely exoteric reading. An esoteric reading, by contrast, reveals - at least to Strauss, Bloom, and other Strauss followers - the opposite: that Socrates's entire speech was meant to be ironic - a reductio ad absurdum - and that he is, in Bloom's words (page 421), "actually engaged in a defense of democracy".

Many scholars find this reading difficult to take seriously. For one thing, an esoteric interpretation - like a typical conspiracy theory - by definition can produce little or no empirical justification for itself. A *suspicion*, or an unconscious projection, obviously is not the same as an argument constrained by the words on the paper (the proximity of this sort of approach to postmodern approaches is too obvious to elaborate; and perhaps tellingly, Straussians tend to be very sensitive about suggestions of similarity).

For another, in discussing Plato's views, Aristotle (who studied with Plato), never suggests that Plato wasn't in earnest. Moreover, in the other dialogues, Plato consistently expresses (through Socrates) admiration for Sparta, a closed, totalitarian society resembling the "just" republic advocated by him in "The Republic". Additionally, Socrates's contemporaries (like Aristophanes and Xenophon) many times make reference to Socrates's pro-Spartan sympathies; they make no intimation that there was anything "ironic" about this spartophilia. And if *this* wasn't enough, as a matter of historical fact, a number of Socrates's devout followers betrayed open, democratic Athens by helping Spartan agents organize a coup d'etat (resulting in many Athenian deaths).

So, the Straussian view that Plato, the starry-eyed admirer of Socrates, was actually an ironic, closet Jeffersonian democrat, despite championing totalitarian communism for an entire essay and defending its Spartan incarnation in several other dialogues, is a minority view. That is worth bearing in mind as you read Bloom's essay, which argues for it. (For those interested in the canonical argument against Strauss's view, look up the essay "Sphinx with a Secret", by English classicist Miles Burnyeat).

About the fidelity of Bloom's translation, I cannot say much, not knowing Greek. I do know that, to their credit, Straussians prefer the most accurate translations possible, and certainly Bloom makes clear in the preface here that literalness is his goal (but see other reviews for concerns about Bloom's skill as a translator).

So let me wrap it up.

Plato's "Republic" is an immensely thought-provoking book. Its dramatic and literary artistry is fairly magnificent. The questions it grapples with are timeless and require some sort of answer for the establishment of any regime.

But it is also deeply problematic. It contains a number of contradictions (beyond the scope of this review). It asks important questions, but leaves them unanswered, or answered in seemingly malignant ways. Yes, it is dangerous: it advocates for the destruction of individual rights in favour of total state control over every aspect of human life, in the name of achieving an abstract ideal of justice. Enough lunatics, just in the past century, have given themselves over to similar intuitions, and the results were hellish.

Bottom line is, "The Republic", like the Bible or the Koran, is a lot of things: inspiring and deflating, good and bad, safe and dangerous, virtuous and vicious. But it is probably worth a careful read at least once in your life, in any case.

Good luck. I hope this review helped someone. ... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (7)

Bad shipping
I ordered this book for a class on the 11th with 2 day shipping... and on the 20th it has yet to be shipped. As I ordered this from amazon, and not an independent seller, I expected to get it in the time frame estimated, as the book is in stock. If it is not shipped within the next day, I plan to cancel my order.

Fantastic!
The great Seth Benardete has provided an accurate and intriguing translation of this classic masterpiece. The "Ladder of Love" by Bloom is also included, and is as equally important to a fuller understanding of the symposium as a good translation is.
*Note: the ladder of love is a chapter from Bloom's Love and Friendship, so be aware that if you already have this you are mainly buying Benardete's translation. On that note, it is one of the best translations around.

A timeless discourse on desire
Plato's Symposium is a discourse on the nature and origins of love and eroticism.This is done through a lengthy dialogue at the dinner party at the home of Agathon, where he and his guests, including Socrates (his lover), partake in wine and take turns eulogizing Eros, the god of love and desire.Each does his best to praise the god, while Socrates comments on them afterward through speech and dialogue.In the end, the party is joined by the intoxicated Alcibiades, who speaks of Socrates's honorable traits while also confessing his love and desire for him.

Symposiums in Greek society were a chance for men to recline on couches and drink, converse, debate and party with one another.They were usually held to celebrate a young male entering aristocratic society, and normally these youths would attend as the companion of one of the adults with whom we was involved in a pederastic relationship.The arguments and topics presented in the Symposium can be difficult for the average modern reader to comfortably comprehend, as nearly each speech somehow turns inevitably to the subject of, and ultimate praise of, pederasty.This physical and emotional love between a man and a youth is held in high regard in the Symposium's reasoning, often being seen as more pure and more desirable than one between a man and a woman.The latter is more bent on procreation and physical attraction, while, in their eyes, pederasty deals more with souls and the love of that which is alike.It is these assumptions, which arise in each speech, which can make it difficult for one to agree completely with one of the character's arguments. Nevertheless, it is possible to find persuasive elements in each of their various speeches that can reveal valuable insight into the ways and reasons that human beings love and are beloved.

The young Phaedrus is the first to honor Eros.The value of his view lies in his belief that a man who loves is a man who cares, and thus a man who strives to do good and not bring about shame to him or the ones he loves.Pausinias is next to speak, and he is persuasive in distinguishing the two manifestations of Eros, or two types of love: the love of the physical (Pandemus) and the love of the spiritual (Uranian).He then correctly places the spiritual love higher, for those of the other kind "are in love with their bodies and not their souls" and they can be "in love with the stupidest there can be, for they have an eye only to act [sexually] and are unconcerned with whether it is noble or not" (Plato 10).He decrees that one must love both the body and the soul, for if one loves only the body, "as soon as the bloom of the body fades - which is what he was in love with - `he is off and takes wing'" (Plato 13).

The third to speak is Eryximachus, whose speaks rightly of loves impact upon art and beauty.Aristophanes next gives an amusing, although no less romantic, portrayal of primordial balls of flesh rolling around, and being split into two parts, and searching the rest of its life for its other half to finally complete itself.It illustrates the loneliness one feels when without their lover.Agathon then gives an eloquent speech, the highlight of which is Eros's power to bring humans together in happiness.

Lastly, the wise Socrates speaks.At first he uses what has presently been deemed `Socratic dialogue' by asking Agathon a series of questions in order to bring out inconsistencies in his argument.By doing this, he is able manipulate a conversation to his liking, and convince the person he is conversing with of his own opinion by making it seem as though they arrived at that idea themselves.In this instance, Agathon originally said that Eros was by nature good and beautiful, but when examining the nature of love through Socrates' interrogation, he concludes that Eros is neither good nor beautiful.Socrates furthers his explanation by recounting a dialogue he had with a wise woman named Diotima of Mantineia.The genius of this instance is the realization of procreation being a way for an individual to seek immortality, and the need to create, in general, things such as art or great ideas or laws are driven from this need to be remembered.Human beings not only generate but also nurture to further the guarantee that their mark will be made lasting, whether it is a child or an epic.This could certainly account for the passion in humans for fame and/or reproduction, and gives terrific insight into the ultimate purposes of most human actions.(However, Diotima seems to fall short in one part of her argument when she says that man "will never generate in the ugly" for he desires beauty and good too greatly, yet infamy through death and fear has certainly been a motivating factor in many men's actions through their course to fame and remembrance).

In this publication by The University of Chicago Press the reader is given Seth Benardete's beautiful translation along with the Allan Bloom's insightful "Ladder of Love," which offers an analysis of the ancient text (although some background knowledge of the historical Socrates would ensure getting the most out of this essay).Plato's Symposium proves to be a wonderfully philosophical discourse on desire, although some of its ideas, as identified earlier, are justly outdated.Nevertheless, it provides a glimpse into the inner workings of man's heart and the forces that propel him to go on each day.

Decent
I found many of the ideas about love in the Symposium very interesting and the Ladder of Love that followed was also good to read.

best edition available
This is an elegant and accurate translation (much more readable than Benardete's gnomic renditions of Theaetetus / Sophist / Statesman). Benardete's essay is also a joy (it was previously published, but in a rather obscure German edition). Bloom's commentary is a bit of a slog and very rarely surprising. The reviewer below who remarked that "if you already have Love and Friendship and a copy of the Symposium you might feel gyped [sic]" has missed the mark; the prize here is the translation itself. Now if only Chicago had included Blanckenhagen's "Stage and Actor" as well! ... Read more

Product Description
The author of The Closing of the American Mind argues that basic human connections--love and friendship--are withering away, asserting that humans' impoverished feelings are rooted in an impoverished language of love. 200,000 first printing. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (8)

Poets and Philosophers offer "self-help"
This is essentially a self-help book but Bloom tries to get us to look to the philosophers and poets, who have thought seriously about romantic love and friendship, for guidance rather than a psychology professor.

The Kirkus review is pretty far off the mark-- I dont think reviewer read more than 50 pages of the book.

While it is true that Bloom rails against our modern culture of "hook-ups" and one night stands (his main complaint is that sex without love and passion is kind of boring and not really worthy of human capacity)-- he only spends thirty pages on the subject. But the heart of the book are chapters on Rousseau and Romanticism (Stendhal, Jane Austen, Flaubert, Tolstoy); Shakespeare (Romeo and Juliet, Anthony Cleopatra, Measure for Measure, The Winter's Tale); and a chapter called "The Ladder of Love" that focuses on Plato's "Symposium."

The thesis of the book is pretty clear (despite what the Kirkus reviewer thinks): erotic love and friendship are two human endeavors that are among our most important undertakings.And their importance compels us to spend some time thinking about them with the some of humanities great thinkers.

Please allow enough time, patience, and attention to absorb this wonderful book.
One would need to go back to this book aqain and again, in order to fully appreciate its depth and thoughfulness. Ideally, one would have read all the books Bloom refers to, in order to have a real grasp of what he is saying, but it is not essential. Bloom stays close to the various author's intent, in describing their thoughts, and so reading this book is not only an inspiriation, it is an education in itself. I cannot recommend it highly enough!!!

You Can't Love Enemies, Only Friends -- It's A Fact!
Friendship is a skill.It takes skill to meet and get to know someone, to solve disagreements and problems, to understand and communicate.It is possible to have friends in far-off places, like my pen pal, Carlos Ubach, in Sabadell (near Barcelona), Spain and those fellows I adore out in Los Angeles.Also a couple in Denver.There is such a thing as long distance friendship where you learn to care for that person as much as your own children (sometimes more so), and it is possible to love someone you've never met in person in today's world of the Internet.Just be careful who you trust.Caring is usually contagious, but it takes two to become real (even incidental) friends.

Part of the final play, as in a game of football, in friendship mending (when things go sour), must be forgiveness.First, you must learn to forgive yourself; after all, you are not God -- you're only human, and humans make mistakes.Boy, do they!Failing to forgive keeps the anger and hurt right in the middle of friendship.Forgiveness does not mean that you forget.If we were perfect, we could use this mistake as a stepping stone to not ever do the same thing again.But, alas, we tend to make the same mistakes over and over. I know that I do.

To conquer friendship problems, this book gives a good strategy to follow:Help your friend solve his problem himself.Emphathize and understand his thoughts and worries.Listen and ask questions.Put yourself in your friend's situation.Focus on the reasons behind the problems and change what is causing the tension and abhorrence.Realize that problems come to all friendships.Find and use information to change matters for the better.Notice feelings, yours and your friend's.What is making them act the way they do and to continue when it is way past time to correct the differences.Discuss!Discuss the problems directly.

A childhood song goes:"Make new friends and keep the old.One is silver, the other gold."It is exciting to meet and get to know new friends.This excitement is called "the romance of newness"But it eventually wears off.All relationships have this exciting beginning and then settle down.Don't ever give up on the people you value.I don't.Last words are lasting words.Something to ponder and not ever forget.

The author was born 400 years too late.
A brilliant writer and social critic, and known as one of the best Greek scholars of the twentieth century, the author gives in this book his insights and concerns regarding the status of love and friendship as humanity moved closer to the 21st century. As in his earlier writings, the author sometimes is right on target, and at other times dead wrong. Indeed, in the latter case, the author's claims are surprising considering his sometimes considerable insight into American culture.

The author expresses deep regret at the current status of "eros". Science, he says, has reduced love to sex, and the word "love" has been applied to most everything except for the overwhelming attraction of one individual to another. People are too open about sex, he complains, and have lost their "puritanical shame" when discussing it in public. But, he does not substantiate his assertions with any amount of statistics. If he did this, it would make this book a scientific study, and the author believes clearly has a negative attitude about science. It is responsible for getting us into this trouble, e.g. the Kinsey report.

All the talk about "relationships" is not any good either, according to the author. Egalitarianism and individualism have reduced romantic relationships to contractual matters. In addition, the last one hundred years has not seen any great "novelists of love". The current romantic novel is "cheap" and suitable only for housewives. To be a romantic today, he says, is like being a "virgin in a whorehouse", and does not conform to the times. Again though, no statistical support is given. The author shouts loud, and carries a small stick of evidence.

The many unsubstantiated claims in the book are balanced by some of its virtues. The author's use of Rousseau is clever, and his analysis of Julien Sorel, the individualistic rogue of Stendahl's "Red and the Black" is brilliant. In fact, all who love (love?) this novel would benefit greatly from reading the author's opinions of it. He sees correctly that there is a fight between the ancients and the moderns. But what he does not see is that the moderns are clearly winning, but only because of what they have inherited from the ancients.

Far from science demeaning the value of love and sex, it has enhanced it. It has taught us that the imagination is not some uncaused force that comes from outside us, but instead is part of who we are. We in large measure, via our ideas and thoughts, determine its contents. But our brains can shuffle these ideas and thoughts and create ones more interesting, fun, and erotic than what perhaps we intended. The more sophisticated our understanding of our brains, the more we appreciate their workings, and the more intoxicated we become in the free play of our imagination.

Contrary to what the author claims, romance has not been reduced toa contract. Certainly views of marriage have changed as compared to what they were centuries ago. Marriage at that time was typically arranged or thought of as an economic contract, and, most importantly, those kinds of marital arrangements were not frowned upon by those who participated in them. But now love is thought of as more precious, as something not to be tainted by economic considerations. If one is "marrying for money" that is something to be kept hidden, and brings shame to those who admit to it. Indeed, how very different are the views now on marriage! We are now marrying for love, and when compared with the marriages of the 16th century, this is a radical notion.

Reclaiming "Eros"
"Eros" is commonly misinterpreted today as the physical and psychological longing associated the sexual act. Bloom argues that this post-Freudian notion of eros is a dilapidated and impoverished one. "Eros" was not killed merely by Freud, but by his lineage of social scientists, who attempted to de-eroticize "eros" by placing it in the context of meaningless statistics and power-conflict. "Eros" was no longer a romantic notion; it rather became the victim of flakey postmodern and feminist theory that attempted to deconstruct and politicize it. What could be more unromantic than that?

Since it is impoverished from its original Greek meaning, how is it possible to capture the the historical breadth, the romantic essence and the philosophical depth of "eros"?This question represents Bloom's project in 'Love and Friendship.'

'Love and Friendship' analyzes pre-freudian authors of literature who can shed light on the nature of "eros:" Rousseau, Plato, Stendahl, Austen, Shakespeare, Tolstoy, Flaubert.Bloom eschews questionable postmodern hermeneutics (queer theory, feminism, etc.) of these works. Instead, he employs textualist (or literalist) hermeneutics in unfolding the true meaning of these works. To be sure, just as no one photograph can tell us what a table truly looks like, no one author reveals the true essence of "eros." However, many different photographs shed light on the various dimensions of a table, just as a textual analysis of great literature gives us a truer philosophical understanding of romantic love.

This book is a gem. Bloom, who lashes out at the animalism of postmodernity in his seminal 'Closing', extends his project by engaging politicized literary theory on their own turf. However, unlike 'Closing,' this book is not aimed at the ill-read. It would be more prudent for one to read first some of the works analyzed in this book. (e.g. Red and Black, Anna Karenina, Emile, Symposium, Pride and Prejudice, Antony and Cleopatra, etc.) Such background reading is requisite to appreciate and criticize Bloom's analysis. ... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (5)

Shakespeare's Politics
Took so long for the delivery on this product that, after awhile, I was beginning to think it was being delivered by camel!However, you can't go wrong with Bloom.Once you have read him, you don't forget him.He is truly the best scholar in our times on both Plato and Shakespeare.Worth the wait.Excellent book.Reading Bloom's writing educates theeducator of how far textbooks have fallen back in presentation of their material in context.Bloom should be a standard in all libraries: home, public, and school.

Another inspiring tour de force
Bloom's insight into the deepest aspects of humanity may not be matched by anyone, past or present. Having been given the gift of his existence we are magnificently lucky he wrote what he knew so we might scratch the surface. Once again Bloom inspires by penetrating our perpetual present with the permanent and universal. This time he performs this magic through analysis of Shakespeare's plays, their political message, Shakespeare's grasp of what makes us who we are and the great, forever present teacher he has the capacity to serve as, if, at least for the moment, we ignore "new critic" sermons. (He means postmodern sophistry.) What makes Bloom so uplifting is his success in communicating power to the reader. With Bloom's assistance, not control, the reader realizes we too hold the keys to our richest experiences, unavailable to those attached to fashionable dogmas, Right or Left.

Shakespeare's plays deal with fragile balances of humanity as individuals and as associations (civilization) with their impossible reconciliations between competing concepts and ideals, which is what both are made of. The Jew and Christian in Venice - their conflicts between what matters most while still members of the same society, which though peaceful and prosperous engages in the simplification of man; The strength and weakness of men in love, with women and their own self image; the root of tragedy suffered by the hero precisely due to his heroic strengths. Shakespeare acts on so many levels it's hard to fathom anyone could grasp it all without Bloom as escort.

Bloom has a habit of telling the truth about our circumstances and for that he is sure to be character assassinated by those unable to deal with it. We do not, he says, "look at all to books when [we] meet problems in life or think about [our] goals; there are no literary models for [our] conceptions of virtue and vise." Reflecting a deeper fact about "the decay of common understanding of - and agreement on - first principles that is characteristic of our times." Resulting in a "decided lowering of tone in [our] reflections on life and its goals." Thus we are "technically well equipped but Philistine." But Shakespeare provides an opportunity to see out of this, as do other great books Bloom was so taken by and wrote about elsewhere.

Solid scholarship and thoughtful ideas
While many study Shakespeare for literature or theatre, Bloom and Jaffa try to discover Shakespeare for political insights. The authors' study of The Merchant of Venice and Othello both give readers an understanding of an outsider's role in a community while Julius Caesar and King Learn demonstrate that political power at the top is more tenuous than it many times appears.

Othello is an accepted member of Venice and is even a hero of sorts, but co-existence isn't full citizenship argue Bloom and Jaffa.Citizenship in a homogenous society requires that one adhere to the same customs and even have the same background.Othello may be a hero, but he's still an outsider.Iago uses this insecurity to convince Othello that his wife is unfaithful.Bloom and Jaffa certainly consider Othello a tragic figure of sorts, but he's one largely of his own making.If Othello were to realize that he's incapable of being accepted totally in such a closed society he would have made better choices himself.This would have kept him from making an enemy of the envious Iago.

Bloom and Jaffa also have a different take on the question of King Lear.They think the most important political message occurs in the very first scene of the very first act.While many consider Lear's idea of dividing his kingdom among his daughters the evidence of a foolish old man, the authors argue that Lear was a great king and only a great king could be guilty of such a terrible mistake.No other English King in Shakespeare's writing was able to unite the whole British empire.Shakespeare made this point up front so that you would realize what a great man King Lear is when the play opens.It's important that Lear be seen as great not foolish, because when a great king makes the biggest mistake, the tragedy is all the more sorrowful.

You might not agree with every premise or conclusion in this book, but you'll certainly get to weigh the new ideas versus your own.The result should be a better understanding of the Bard as a political animal.The book has sure given me a new outlook on these characters.

See Shakespeare In Another Light
It should be obvious that Shakespeare wrote great literature.That fact is assumed by the authors of this book.However, Allan Bloom and Harry Jaffa demonstrate a deeper awareness of Shakespeare than one will find in literature departments.Shakespeare combined poetry with an acute knowledge of politics, and these excellent scholars have written a clear and convincing account of some of those facets of political wisdom.Read this fine book and help rescue Shakespeare from political irrelevance.

Powerful. Pungent. Political and philosophical too.
It is difficult to convey how wonderful I found this thin little book to be. It is no larger than a slice of rye bread, but the food for thought contained therein could feed a soul for a thousand days. It took me twomesermizing hours to get through the Introduction and Bloom's essay on 'TheMerchant of Venice'. At first, I mistrusted my recollection- was therereally so much there? Had the dry old play decayed so completely in myestimation, or had Bloom inserted his own opinions? No, after more blissfulconsternation, I relived what I had long taken for dead. Allan Bloom reallysees things. His deft insight makes Shakespeare seem real and urgent again,despite how unfashionable and out of vogue the debate may seem tocontemporary minds. The Jewish and the Christian come to light, the entirelegacy of each Faith revealed keenly, sharply, and decisively in favour ofone higher power. The authority of thought, the power of unaided reasonbrought to bear nakedly on an eternal, ever-so tender, sore. Bloom's essayon 'Othello' and 'Julius Cesear' prove out this reviewer's intial wonder atthe work. To readers familiar with Bloom's other works, I include myself,this book was additionally worthy because it showed that the issue AllanBloom later became famous for, the decay of education, was already at theforefront of his mind in the early 1960's. He states in the book'sintroduction and claims it as his motivation for publishing the essay. Thiswas 1964, several years before the signifigant events of the 1960s tookfull shape and bore full weight on American society. The introductionincludes Bloom's stark assessment of Poetry and Philosophy. He quotesNapolean (one of very few direct quotes, the footnotes are rich, but few)to argue for the superiority of poetry over politics and then slylydemostrates the superiority of philosophy, or the philosopher, true andproper, over poetry. This is a book you could own and keep and rereadoften, even secrete it undercover and carry it across hostile borders, realand imagined. ... Read more

Product Description
The bestselling author of The Closing of the American Mind probes deeper into America's intellectual promise and its failings with thoughts on teachers, books, and education. Written with passion, wit, and insight, these stimulating essays confirm Bloom as one of America's boldest and most controversial thinkers. "Lucid and penetrating."--Chicago Tribune. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (4)

Like experiencing imaginary superiority
There are experts at experiencing imaginary superiority, and Allan Bloom illustrates how many ways it is possible for an American professor of the University of Chicago to acknowledge such situations.For philosophical completeness, the book GIANTS AND DWARFS:ESSAYS 1960-1990 includes a translation of Plato's dialogue "Hipparchus or the Profiteer" translated by Steven Forde, in which the question of aim arises early:

COMRADE:The profiteer, Socrates, thinks he ought to make a profit from everything.
SOCRATES:Don't answer me so aimlessly, as though you had suffered some injustice from someone, but pay attention to me and answer as though I asked you again from the beginning:don't you agree that the profiteer knows about the worth of this thing from which he considers it worthwhile to make a profit?(p. 95)

The comments of Allan Bloom, in searching for "profound possibilities of human life" (p. 105) in the origins of political philosophy, also caution us to learn "of the capital importance of the virtue of moderation in the political thought of the ancient authors."(p. 105).Keeping everything political is the surest way of convincing American readers that we are not really talking about saintly characters, so we might easily agree with Socrates "that the one making the reproach is himself of the same sort."(p. 104).Bloom has been leading up to this view in his discussion of Shakespeare's "Richard II.""Knowledge of political things brings with it the awareness that in order for the sacred to become sacred terrible deeds must be done.Because God does not evidently rule, the founder of justice cannot himself be just."(p. 93).

The Preface attempts to explain where Bloom has been coming from, and I appreciate the mention of Nietzsche on the last page of the Preface as a guide to understanding the nature of the intellectual contrasts which this book expects from Lemuel Gulliver, Xenophon, Socrates, Rousseau, Plato, and Leo Strauss.The Address delivered at Harvard University on December 7, 1988, is a prime example of the complex and fascinating psychology of democracy.(p. 13).After Bloom's book, THE CLOSING OF THE AMERICAN MIND, was a big hit, Allan Bloom became a professor identified with "American anti-intellectualism" for trying to preserve thought about our heritage from the political antielitists seeking a uniform view in the humanities.

At the time of THE CLOSING OF THE AMERICAN MIND, I was most interested in seeing that book as a failure to consider the intellectual power of rock 'n' roll.GIANTS AND DWARFS contains a translation of Plato's dialogue "Ion or On the Iliad" translated by Allan Bloom, with his discussion of it.The cultural significance of a contest of rhapsodes dedicated to a god was not despised by Socrates, who "often envied you rhapsodes, Ion, for your art.For that it befits your art for the body to be always adorned and for you to appear as beautiful as possible, and that, at the same time, it is necessary to be busy with many good poets and above all with Homer, the best and most divine of poets, and to learn his thought thoroughly, not just his words, is enviable."(pp. 124).Ion is the prize-winning expert at reciting Homer dramatically, but Socrates shows how little this matters by mentioning the other major poets, Hesiod and Archilochus, the former a master of cataloguing the Greek gods in his "Theogony," and the latter, a 7th century BC general ("They'll say I was a mercenary,") who died in battle, who won more fame for the battle about which he wrote a poem in which he dropped his shield and ran away.Bloom found Ion's devotion to Homer shallow."For Ion, Homer is sufficient, for the sole reason that it is for reciting Homer's poetry that golden crowns are awarded."(p. 141).
The longest explanation by Socrates is about how poems are created "not by art but by divine dispensation, each is able to do finely only that to which the Muse has impelled him."(pp. 129-130).What is most common in a society which has produced a number of poems that exceeds everyone's fantasies is that a single poet will be commonly known for one work, as Socrates says of "Tynnichus, the Chaldean, who never composed any poem worth remembering other than the poem which everybody sings and which is very nearly the finest of all songs, being simply, as he himself says, `a discovery of the Muses.' "(p. 130).Socrates asks about the great dramatic moments, "are you in your right mind?Or do you become beside yourself, and does your soul think it is at the scene of the deeds of which you speak in your inspiration, either at Ithaca, or Troy, or wherever the epic takes place?"(p. 130).Bloom is most aware of the politics of winning approval."Ion has no satisfactions which are not dependent on the approval of his spectators.He needs the cities as they need him.For political men the accident of where they are born is decisive in limiting their possibilities of fulfillment."(p. 161).Bloom wrote that in 1970, when he still pictured thinking as being the opposite of rock 'n' roll.Rock's answer might be the song, "Analyse" by The Cranberries.See both video versions, plus a live version at Vicar Street, in which she calls the song, "Don't Analyse," on the DVD "Stars."

Noble savagery
Bloom represented an austere (and understandably rare) conservatism that didn't depend on the consolations of religion, or of greed. (The latter approach to political philosophy is sometimes known as "libertarianism.") One surprise (though not, come to think of it, to readers of THE CLOSING OF THE AMERICAN MIND) is the esteem in which Bloom held Rousseau as a thinker (Rousseau as a person not being admirable by anybody).

I particularly recommend Bloom's acute but enraged critique of John Rawls' A THEORY OF JUSTICE--microsurgery deftly performed with a chainsaw.

Noble savagery
Bloom represented an austere (and understandably rare) conservatism that didn't depend on the consolations of religion, or of greed. (The latter approach to political philosophy is sometimes known as "libertarianism.") One surprise (though not, come to think of it, to readers of THE CLOSING OF THE AMERICAN MIND) is the esteem in which Bloom held Rousseau as a thinker (Rousseau as a person not being admirable by anybody).

I particularly recommend Bloom's acute but enraged critique of John Rawls' A THEORY OF JUSTICE--microsurgery deftly performed with a chainsaw.

An excellent collection of Bloom's lesser known essays
I must admit that I am not usually a fan of posthumous essay collections, but this book had some truly wonderful nuggets of wisdom and insight, as well as a great introduction about the man himself (which was my real exposure to Bloom as a man... well, before Ravelstein anyway).I studied under one of Bloom's students at the University of Maine and feel that this was one of the most important influences on my life as a scholar.A truly wonderful read and some very interesting essays about diverse materials. ... Read more

Product Description
A clear, readable, and highly engrossing translation of Rousseau's masterpiece on the education and training of the young. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (8)

Still in print!
The Basic Books edition, Allan Bloom translator, is still in print and is far and away the best edition available for the money.The Amazon page gives the impression that the book is out of print.This is not true.

Total Rip-Off
*update: please note that this review is/was for the NuVision Hardcover that is erroneously linked with the Basic Books paperback:

I searched "Allan Bloom Emile" and this book came up first! Sabotoge! This is just a plain public domain re-publishing--probably on demand-- of the Foxley translation from 1911. There are no notes or introduction or anything. If you just want a copy of Rousseau's Emile without concern for edition, translation, etc. you'd be crazy to spend this kind of money when better editions are available at a fraction of the cost.

If you want a quality printing with excellent introduction and notes as well as index you need the Allan Bloom translation(Basic Books 1979). It has a light blue cover. And it's much cheaper than what they're asking for this thing. Curiously it doesn't come up unless you search "Rousseau Emile Allan Bloom"; the Bloom translation is also available in an expensive scholarly edition (collected works of Rousseau) that comes up with just "Allan Bloom Emile".

Very dense. Old-fashioned ideas. Interesting.
If you want to know how people raised their children over a hundred years ago, read this book. It's interesting for what it is, but it's very intense and negative in my opinion. It's great for research and to acquire insight on how people thought long ago, but besides that, it's a tough read. I read often, but with this book, I have to read each paragraph a few times to get all the underlying meanings. It's a good secondary book to read periodically while in the middle of other books.

Post-Modern Child Rearing
A deceptively simple text. Rousseau has distanced himself from the Social Contract and the concept of the noble savage here, and has decided to illustrate the principles of an education that will bring about `natural man.' Emile is his guinea pig, whom he allows to grow on his own accord. His governor and nurse impose nothing on him, and he is allowed to build and explore without any external authority, eventually choosing a vocation and place in society.

For Rousseau, the most important property of modern society that is inimical to man is the exertion of authority and power over the subject. Emile is allowed to grow and flourish without the arbitrary directives of parent/authority figures. And as always, Rousseau's prose is light and wonderful. He falls short in the section on Emile's counter-part Sophie, who embodies practically all of the sexist facets of enlightenment prejudice, but this remains a very great work of political theory in spite of its shortcomings and frequent meanderings.

great book, great translation
Rousseau has a reputation as a hypocrite and a left wing nut job.He certainly didn't practice what he preached but his writings cannot be reduced to serve mere partisan purposes.Everyone can learn something from this book.Allan Bloom does a great job of turning this book into good English.The translation is intended to be quite literal, but nonethess reads very smoothly.Highly recommended. ... Read more

Product Description
The acclaimed series The Collected Writings of Jean-Jacques Rousseau concludes with a volume centering on Emile (1762), which Rousseau called his "greatest and best book." Here Rousseau enters into critical engagement with thinkers such as Locke and Plato, giving his most comprehensive account of the relation between happiness and citizenship, teachers and students, and men and women.

In this volume Christopher Kelly presents Allan Bloom's translation, newly edited and cross-referenced to match the series. The volume also contains the first-ever translation of the first draft of Emile, the "Favre Manuscript," and a new translation of Emile and Sophie, or the Solitaries. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

Reason allows us to live for something
I read Plato's Republic for a graduate philosophy class. I paid close attention to Plato's thesis of courage in his Republic, which I expound below. I found G. M. A. Grubb's translation to be the best of several I read.

Plato's project in the Republic is to form the "perfect" society. "Reason allows us to live for something." Through reason we set goals and organize our lives around achieving goals. Plato argues that the government's duty to citizens is to provide justice, and educate citizens both men and women. The state's social structure stood for justice and was divided into three groups. Rulers- those trained to use reason and posses wisdom. Guardians/ Soldiers have courage/spirit. Artisans have moderation of appetites. Plato's ideal ruler, the "Philosopher King," should be 50 years old with 15 years of government experience and should have studied science and philosophy. The ruler must show a mastery of Arete = excellence vs. akrasia= weakening of will, or no self-control. The ruler should think logically not emotionally. In the Republic to insure excellent people Plato advocated selective breeding of excellent unmarried people who lived in communes, who did not own property.

Plato describes five types of government in the Republic:

1. Aristocracy- Plato considered this the best form of government; aristocracy embodies wisdom of the philosopher king.
2. Timocracy- military government embodies virtues of honor and courage.
3. Oligarchy- rule by a rich elite, their vice is greed, the rich get richer, the poor get poorer.
4. Democracy- mob rule, and chaos, it represents akrasia people are slaves of their desires and have little self-control.
5. Tyranny- this is the worst form of government. The vice is selfishness, one power crazed person in control.

Plato's purpose in the Republic is not to perfect the character of people as an end but only as a means to an end. Plato's aim has a definite effect on his definition of courage. I find this is especially the case when exploring his ideas on how to educate the Guardians of the city to act courageously. Plato's goal is to match a person's character disposition to a job they are naturally inclined to perform in the city. Once he [Plato] has introduced the city in 369 b-d, he immediately advances the thesis, which is to dominate the rest of the Republic, that the needs of its inhabitants can best be met if each person in it performs that single task, and that single task alone, for which he is naturally suited.

With this view of human nature in mind, in Plato's model society, he divides the citizens into three classes. Rulers from whom the "philosopher king," will be selected, Guardians who are soldiers to protect the state, and the rest of the citizens classified as Artisans This division of citizens precipitates a discussion by Plato on the four virtues that these citizens will bring to the state. In the history of philosophy this becomes known as the "four cardinal virtues"; wisdom, courage, moderation, and justice. With this introduction of courage as a virtue, Plato takes another crack at defining courage. What is also important to observe is that he introduces a new element, that of education, in his definition of courage that was absent from his early dialogue Laches.

Plato espouses the idea in the Republic that the Guardians need to possess certain natural qualities; such as strength, speed, and courage. It seems odd that Plato classifies courage as a natural quality possessed by certain people. This automatically presupposes that not all people can practice the virtue of courage. Plato's successor Aristotle, will argue against this notion in his EN. In addition, Plato argues that in order for people to be courageous they must also have an aggressive thumos [passion], which makes both people and animals fearless and determined. Plato fears that the Guardians could be susceptible to using their passion of aggressiveness against there own people. Therefore, he counsels that the Guardians who naturally possess aggressiveness have to also naturally possess the opposite characteristic of gentleness as well, so that their aggressiveness will only be used against the enemy and not their own citizenry.

This dialogue is significant in that it helps to flesh out Plato's notion of what ultimately makes a person courageous. First, Plato argues that the goal of education, which he compares to a sheepdog, is to watch over the Guardians; thus, with the proper education he believes the proper balance between exciting their aggressiveness and subduing it in the Guardians can be achieved. Second, Plato believes that if aggressiveness is properly excited by physical training, then the Guardian will be courageous. If overly excited they will be like a wild beast devoid of grace and will become ignorant. Finally, Plato argues in his education section of the Republic, that to counter the possibility of a Guardian developing an over excited passion of aggressiveness, it is necessary to teach the Guardians literature and music during the same time they undergo physical training.

Thus, Plato hopes this balanced approach to educating the Guardians will then lead to courage being a controlled and calm act of endurance in battle, instead of a foolhardy lust for blood letting and an emotional reaction to war. Not only does Plato spend a significant amount of time advocating for the tools necessary to subdue the passions of the Guardians in book three of the Republic, but another important point in Plato's philosophy to consider is that since he believes that a Guardian's aggressiveness is influenced by literature he is very concerned by what type of literature is taught to them as well. Plato is very concerned that the archetypical heroic warrior Achilles, as depicted in Homer's epic poem the Iliad along with those depicted in Greek tragedies performed on stage, are bad examples for the Guardians to emulate. Consequently, Plato advises that heroes of Greek literature should be depicted as thoughtfully courageous and in control of their anger and physically resilient warriors. Thus, Plato seems to be using the term andreia [courage] to cover (at the least) both courage proper, which can only exist in some kind of unity with the other virtues, and raw mettle or aggressiveness, which can exist in conjunction with various vices. Plato in book four of the Republic does move on from his study of thumos as the prime motivating force to act courageously, to actually defining the virtue of courage. Plato defines courage as a person's ability to subdue their aggressiveness by the orders of their reason in regards to what they should be fearful of regardless of their own feelings of pain or pleasure. Plato's expounded definition of the virtue of courage is that a courageous act is an amalgamation of a person's natural passion of aggressiveness and properly educated rational beliefs over what is worthy regarding the possibility of losing their life or limb over.
... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (3)

A Good Book about Shakespeare
While not as good as, say, Shakespeare's Politics or Shakespeare as a Political Thinker, this book is quite fine and analyzes a few of the plays in the Shakespeare cannon.Especially good is the analysis of Propero, Romeo & Juliet, and Antony and Cleopatra.The short final chapter on Hal and Falstaff is quite interesting as well.This book makes a fine read, even if it is not as good as some of the other books on Shakespeare's deep thinking.

Interesting readings and championing
Chicago has published the Shakespeare part of _Love and Friendship_separately. Not knowing the play, I had to skip the chapter on Measure forMeasure, but found the interpretations of Hal and Falstaff, Romeo andJuliet, Antony and Cleopatra, and the Winter's Tale intriguing. They seemto me to be a little long on plot detail, particularly in the lastinstance, but what Bloom wrote about Ulysses, Hector, Antony, Falstaff,Mercurtio, Romeo, Friar Laurance, and Prospero is at least tenable. And heis particularly acute about Juliet, Prospero, Octavius, Achilles, andFalstaff.

I am not convinced that Shakepeare was so conscious apolitical theorist as Bloom supposes, systematically surveying differentkinds of political communities. (That was Aristotle!). or illustratingMachiavelli (that was Leo Strauss and his students such as Bloom)Shakespeare certainly portrayed a range of human relationships, though withsome more reucrrent patterns than one would guess from reading Bloom.

In particular, I think that Bloom fails to examine the generallyone-way erotics of many friends disappointed by being abandoned forwedlock. There is very little representation of what happens after theweddings which are the "happy endings" for some youth, while disasters flowfrom established marital and quasi-marital relationships in Macbeth, Antonyand Cleopatra, Hamlet,Othello, and even Romeo and Juliet, including thedeaths of all the title characters in these plays.

Bloom's notionthat Rome's imperial expansion was over by the time Octavius defeatedAntony is very peculiar. Is it that there is no great literature aboutTrajan than makes Bloom ignore the later imperial growth? There was no "endof politics" or shortage of enemies, internal or external, for lateremperors to contend against.

As an introduction to Bloom's valuesand ways of thinking about canonical texts, this volume is far superior toSaul Bellow's fictionalized memoir, _Ravelstein_. _Shakespeare's Politics_is even better an introduction.

Friendship
Though not as tight as Shakespeare's Politics, this group of essay's by Bloom is the fruitful result of many years of careful study. Of particular interest is the section on Hal and Falstaff. More clearly than ever before,Bloom discusses the pleasure and ambiguity of the highest sort offriendship. Philosophy and Falstaff are congruent but not equal....theyboth hover just outside of the city and must remain there except in thecase of friendship.

Cosimo Rucellai ... Read more

Product Description
With the communist nations a shambles everywhere, the American constitution may appear to have weathered its greatest challenge. Yet notions hostile to its principles pose no less serious threats. Ways of thinking that spring from the social sciences, for example, launch a direct assault on US traditions. This book addresses the question, can the constitution survive postconstitutional thought? The 17 essays in this volume examine first the precepts of the founding fathers and their mentors. Then the most significant postconstitutional ideas are outlined, together with analyses of how they harmonize with the constitution and how they undermine it. Bloom is author of "The Closing of the American Mind". ... Read more

Product Description
How modern education has failed in modern society. ... Read more

Product Description
Blooms of toxic or harmful microalgae, commonly called "red tides", represent a significant and expanding threat to human health and fisheries resources throughout the world. The impacts of these "harmful algal blooms" range from illness and death of human consumers of shellfish or fish that have accumulated algal toxins to ecosystem alteration and mortalities of marine mammals and other animals. Presented here is a state-of-the art review of all major topics relating to the ecology and physiology of harmful algal bloom species. The autecology of all major groups is covered in detail, and the ecophysiological processes and mechanisms that regulate their growth, bloom development, and toxin production are addressed as well. ... Read more

Product Description
a Bertoni
 
 PARTE IV. LA VIDA SOCIAL DE LOS SÍMBOLOS Y RITUALES NACIONALES
 
 13. Sociogénesis de la escisión entre democracia y nación
 La vida social del ritual del 25 de Mayo
 Por Alejandro Grimson y Mirta Amati
 
 14. Sobre las formas populares de narrar la Patria
 Por Pablo Alabarces
 
 15. A la sombra de Hércules
 Por Horacio González
 
 16. Mayo de 2010, entre el pasado y el presente
 Por Alejandro Cattaruzza
 
 PARTE V. CIUDADANÍA, DERECHOS SOCIALES Y DESARROLLO
 ¿LA GLOBALIZACIÓN HIZO DESAPARECER AL ESTADO Y A LA NACIÓN?
 
 17. Ciudadanía, Estado y globalización
 Una mirada desde la Argentina contemporánea
 Por Maristella Svampa
 
 18. Dos grandes temas y una gran omisión
 Acerca de la ciudadanía, el Estado y la nación en la era de la globalización
 Por Inés M. Pousadela
 
 Nota sobre los autores
 
 
 
  ... Read more