The speeches in the Symposium and the different characterizations of Love therein are reflective of the speakers themselves. Phaedrus’ speech reflects his role as the young, superficial beloved, who defines eros in gain and Eryximachus’ shows his more mature and scientific background as the lover, who defines eros in techne. In choosing the portray these caricatures of a lover-beloved relationship through their views of love, Plato provides insight into the dynamics of these relationships and shows the subjectivity inherent in how humans view love.
Phaedrus is the first to speak. He is also the impetus for the entire contest concerning Eros. As put by his lover, Eryximachus, Phaedrus is “indignant” and “often complains” about the lack of proper praise given to Love (177A-177C). At first glance, one might think that perhaps Phaedrus is so concerned with how love is represented because of his inherent youthful romanticism. In fact, upon a scant initial reading, this seems to be the case for Phaedrus’ speech. He exemplifies Eros as the oldest god, according to Parmenides, without generation (178B). He argues that Eros gives us the “greatest goods” by instilling in lovers a fear of shame and a love of honor (178D-178E). Phaedrus further romanticizes death and sacrifice in the name of Love in the mythopoetic tradition (179B- 179E). All of this seems to follow from Phaedrus’ role as the young, attractive beloved to the more mature lover, Eryximachus. However, upon a closer reading, Phaedrus’ full intentions in his speech, and further his root concern with the contest at all, is to praise the benefits which Eros gives the beloved. Riddling his speech is an undercurrent of selfish gain, prioritized over and over again, often supported by a somewhat warped mythological framework. In this characterization of selfish love, Phaedrus defines Eros by an external factor: gain.
Phaedrus’ argument reduces to a definition of erotic virtue requiring “selfishness and visibility” (Rosen 50). In doing so, Phaedrus finds man’s virtue in the “measure of his own conduct”, thus reducing the authority of the gods (Rosen 50). This selfishness all stems from Phaedrus’ perspective as the beloved. Therefore, in his speech he exemplifies the behavior which provides the most benefit to the beloved (Strauss 53). This virtuous behavior from the lover is dependent on the behavior being visible to the beloved (178D). In this, Phaedrus casts virtuous love in the role of providing accountability in the actions of the lover, who acts virtuously under the watch of the beloved for fear of shame. In these sorts of definitions, Phaedrus systematically places all of the responsibility on the lover and casts the beloved as a passive and somehow absolved party.
To support this characterization, Phaedrus draws upon the mythopoetic tradition in a fashion which causes some scholars to label him a “mythologue”, who distorts myth to support his argument (Corrigan 53). Phaedrus asserts that “no one will die for you but a lover”, using the story of Alcestis, who died for her husband, as the mythological support (179C). He claims that the gods delighted in her selfless actions, therefore encouraging the components of death and sacrifice on behalf of the lover. Next, Phaedrus addresses Orpheus, who he argues is “soft...for he did not dare to die” for his love, Eurydice, and instead sought a way to circumvent death and live himself (179D). The reason Phaedrus is so harsh to Orpheus’ plight is because his story “challenges the dependence of the lover” thereby negating the necessity for death and sacrifice which Phaedrus has been arguing (Rosen 56). Phaedrus casts these mythic stories carefully so as to further his idea of a love which demands that the lover be a slave for his desire for the beloved. He rails on Orpheus’ “contrivance” because it undermines this narrative which he has been pushing throughout his speech. It is at this point in the speech where Phaedrus reveals his hand so clearly, showing how very tightly tied his view of love is to his selfish desires as a handsome and coveted beloved.
From this point on, the selfish tone of his speech is apparent. Phaedrus grasps the utility of Eros, arguing that what is “good” is what benefits the beloved (Rosen 52). In reality, this is the reason which Phaedrus thinks that Eros does not get enough attention in prose and rhetoric--because the message of servitude to the beloved is not clearly emphasized outside of the biased view of a beloved narrator. As such, one can guess this is why Phaedrus complains to Eryximachus to begin the contest in the first place. In his view as a handsome young man, the most important aspects of Love are those which benefit beloveds like himself--the gifts and the sacrifices. So Phaedrus’ speech is not naive and overly romanticized. Rather, it shows the clear, calculated selfishness of the narrator. The speeches in the Symposium reflect the lives and views of the speakers themselves. Though they may shroud their more petty motivations in grand philosophical dialogue, the reality of their starkly human and personal issues shines through.
Corrigan, Kevin, and Elena Corrigan. Plato's Dialectic at Play: Argument, Structure, and Myth in the Symposium. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2004.
Rosen, Stanley. Plato's Symposium. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1968.
Strauss, Leo, and Seth Benardete. Leo Strauss on Plato's Symposium. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001.
