Remembering Plato
July 14, `72
It didn't rain today. No sun either, and the wind, although it didn't
blow hard, was relentless. That was all bad; even so, the day was
still good. I sat by the fire and read my book. Except for hanging out
with Hesse's "fictional characters," I was totally alone. There were
no surprises. When I bought the book, the guy who sold it to me back
in Missoula told me I would enjoy it. He was right.
"It's about a marriage," he said, "the unfriendly marriage between
passion and reason." He suggested that Hesse was using the book's
characters to bring to life Plato's description of the soul. After
reading the book, I think the bookseller was at least half right.
Anyway, he got me anticipating a good read and I was not disappointed.
In the book Hesse contrasted the life of the dreamer, poet, and lover
with the more ordered and controlled life of the monk; because of
this, I found the novel rewarding and timely.
But it seemed to me, at the end of the novel at least, Hesse left the
voices of his characters whole, as complements to one another. Plato's
description of the soul was different. As I remembered it he used an
out-of-control chariot to represent an unruly soul. When the driver of
the chariot (reason) brought his skills to bear (spirit) on the reins
of the unruly horses (passions), the out-of-control chariot was
brought back in line with the driver's wishes. In other words,
according to Plato, when reason and spirit were free to rein in the
bodily appetites, a healthy, happy, soul emerged triumphant. For
Hesse, on the other hand, there was no reining in the passions by
reason; rather there was (or should be) a kind of Mexican standoff
between both, in order for a full recognition and appreciation of both
to be achieved, thus permitting the best of both Narcissus and
Goldmund's worlds to go forth and multiply. Well, anyway, that's the
way I read the book and that's what I would have told the bookseller
if he were sitting across the fire from me now.
No comments:
Post a Comment