Abstract

Christopher Rowe's new book is an ambitious attempt to walk the tightrope between, on the one hand, bone-headed neglect of Plato's use of dramatic form, and, on the other, obtuse blindness to the presence of a serious philosophical agenda. This locates Rowe on the cutting edge of current methodological controversies, but his book also has deep roots in the past. He harks back to the oft-maligned Paul Shorey to offer an updated, newly sophisticated "unitarian" reading of the dialogues, one that depends heavily on equating Plato's own voice with that of his Socrates, who serves as "[Plato's] alter ego, his persona, his mask". This Socrates is not merely a mouthpiece for a developing Plato's changing views, but a coherent character who represents a consistent Platonic voice throughout the works in which he appears—and even those in which he doesn't. Among other things, this close identification of Plato with Socrates requires Rowe to apply the principle of charity not just to the author, but to his creation. Since Plato and Socrates are one, Plato is fully accountable for all the arguments he assigns to Socrates: there is no dramatic wiggle-room for him to assign the latter any truly bad arguments for his own authorial purposes.