The Trials of Socrates

The first time I really learned about Socrates and the Socratic Method was in my psychology lecture just a couple months ago.  He was only very briefly mentioned, however, to explain how psychoanalysts today still use the Socratic Method of continual questioning to help their patients find a truth out on their own.  This was the background knowledge I had going into reading this.  First off, Socrates was not my favorite book.  I found it a little hard to read at times, especially in the beginning, in the first section of Plato.  I thought Socrates came off as a little bit arrogant, although when we discussed this in class, Dr. Lowe pointed out that Plato probably did not intend it to come off this way, since they were friends.  I can see the benefit in reading this book though, and why Temple would choose for us to study it.

One reason why Temple probably picked this book is that the Socratic Method is still used today, as previously mentioned.  Socrates is pretty widely known, and is a historical figure who is probably worth knowing at least a little bit about in order to be a well-rounded, functioning member of society.  It also raises an interesting controversy about education: does knowledge corrupt, or is a life without knowledge not worth living?  Being college students, this question is extremely relevant to us in particular.

The account given by Plato seems to suggest that education and learning is totally worth it and important.  Being Socrates’ friend, Plato’s version of the story reflects Socrates’ view on the subject, which can be summed up by the well-known mantra, “the unexamined life is not worth living”.  Socrates was a big supporter of learning and believed that knowledge equals happiness.  His whole method of continuous questioning and entire work of teaching was based upon the principle that we should never be satisfied with what we know and just go through our day without examining our own thinking and decision making.  He was greatly frustrated with the people who were commonly thought of as geniuses, but who in fact (to his finding at least) assumed that they had more knowledge than in actuality.  This is the basis of his popular saying about the unexamined life; his argument is that just because they were skilled at one thing, doesn’t mean that they were wise in general.  Basically, according to Socrates, and therefore Plato, the continual pursuit of knowledge is what characterizes the good life.

Aristophanes, on the other hand, was NOT friends with Socrates and gives a completely different stand on the issue of the benefits/problems with education and learning.  Aristophanes sort of attacks Socrates in his comic play Clouds, which is basically a satire of commonly held beliefs about Socrates.  The message about education here is that it can corrupt!  Strepsiades sends his son to Socrates’ school to learn “the Inferior Argument” and save him from his endless mounds of debts by arguing his way out of paying them back.  This ultimately backfires, when, upon returning from Socrates’ school, the son is no longer willing to listen to his father and argues all sorts of atrocities, such as hitting his mother.  This is in direct contrast with the first account by Plato, in which Socrates was arguing that knowledge does not corrupt and is instead the way to happiness.

These completely opposite viewpoints of the usefulness of education bring the issue to the reader’s attention and beg to be further considered.  This, I think, is why Temple wants us college students to read The Trial and Death of Socrates.

The Rosenbach and Dickens

The Rosenbach Museum and Library is the culmination of the collections of Abraham and Phillip Rosenbach.  These men were Philly-born brothers who had an interest in antiques; Phillip collected antique furniture while Abraham was more interested in books and writing.  Although neither brother ever met Charles Dickens, there is a fairly large collection of his original writings there.  This is a little odd because although Dickens did spend some time in America, he was not very fond of it here.  He openly criticized our culture and materialism in his writing entitled American Notes for General Circulation, which was published after his return to England following his tour in the United States.  For this reason, it is interesting that some very valuable pieces of his work should be kept here in America instead of his beloved homeland of England.  Although this may not have been exactly what Dickens himself would have wanted, I don’t necessarily think it is a bad thing.  Abraham Rosenbach was a big believer in having his collections open to the public, so that everyone could enjoy them without having to travel to somewhere like England.  This, in my opinion, is definitely a good thought, because otherwise someone like me would never be able to enjoy them.  With this in mind, I think how they are displayed and interpreted should be the main focus of the argument, since if the display is really great, more people are going to be able to view and appreciate the work.

I found the Rosenbach to have a nice feel to it; it doesn’t have the traditional museum feeling with large empty rooms with small exhibitions scattered throughout.  Instead, the collections were kept as the brothers had it, in a normal little townhouse on Delancy Place.  The rooms are set up with the priceless artifacts, but they are arranged in such a way that it just looks like your average house.  This allows closer interaction and appreciation for the objects.  The only thing that really frustrated me was that in spite of the fact that they are in possession of some very valuable pieces of Dickens’ work, not much is done to advertise or display it.  The museum offers these “Hands-On Tours”, where visitors can come and handle the manuscripts and get a close up view of the objects on hand.  However, there is only one offered for Dickens, whereas for others such as Marianne Moore or Maurie Sendak, there are several.  This proved to be an especially large problem, because I made the mistake of requesting a spot on the Dickens tour too late and it was cancelled due to low attendance.  Therefore I will be unable to go on a specialized tour of the Charles Dickens collection, which is a shame.

That being said, the operators of the Rosenbach are very kind and extremely helpful.  They apologized for missing the Dickens tour, even though that was really my mistake, and offered me the business card of the librarian, who is willing to make a private appointment with me and essentially tell me everything there is to know about the collection, since she is the expert of all the written works at the museum.  I am especially appreciative of this willingness to help after hearing the stories of my classmates, who are struggling with people at their site being unwilling to discuss their collections with young students such as ourselves. 

All-in-all, I was very impressed with the Rosenbach, although I do wonder why they do not place more of an emphasis on their Charles Dickens collection.  As I have still not yet seen it, I am unable to really comment on the interpretation offered at this museum, but after meeting with the librarian I should be able to shed some more light on this issue.  From what I have seen, though, I am not particularly enthusiastic about the display, since it seems to be much harder than necessary to get a look at these items which the founder of the museum hoped to be accessible to the public.