This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
καὶ κατὰ σῶμα -- διάνοιαν. For σῶμα Stallbaum conjectured σχῆμα, but Plato would surely have said σχήματα, as in 397 B. Hartman boldly ejects κατὰ φωνάς and reads καὶ κατὰ <τὸ> σῶμα καὶ κατὰ τὴν διάνοιαν, remarking that κατὰ τὸ σῶμα by itself includes “gestus, habitus, vocem, vultum, similia.” This is in a sense true, but there is no reason why one particular instance of physical resemblance should not be selected for special remark. Plato differentiates the external from the internal characteristics by combining σῶμα and φωνάς under a single preposition, and repeating κατά before τὴν διάνοιαν. αὐτούς. For αὐτούς following ὧν see on II 357 B. The rule against the repetition of the relative in such cases is sometimes dispensed with for the sake of rhetorical emphasis, e.g. in II 374 B and perhaps Theaet. 192 B. μιμεῖσθαι. In what sense can the guardians be said to ‘imitate’ in such a case, or in those specified in 396 A, B? Not as actors, but as spectators. Acting involves three elements—the character, the actor, and the spectator. In good acting the spectator identifies himself with the actor through sympathy; and as the actor ‘imitates,’ so does he. Such is Plato's theory, though merely glanced at here. Cf. X 605 C ff., Ion 533 D ff., and see the excellent remarks of Nettleship Lectures and Remains II pp. 100—104. ἢ ἀνδρὶ κτλ. ἀνδρί is of course ‘husband,’ not simply ‘a man’ (D. and V.). Contemporary comedy doubtless furnished abundant illustrations. In πρὸς θεοὺς ἐρίζουσαν κτλ. Plato may be thinking of Aeschylus' Niobe (see on II 380 A). The emphasis on οἰομένην should be noted: cf. I 336 A note
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.