Answering early critics of the Phaedrus' styles and strategies

Early in Hermias’ commentary on the Phaedrus (6.27 Lucarini & Moreschini) in the course of his summary of the dialogue’s content, we are already reminded that the Phaedrus tackles the question of exactly what good writing is. Questions about the appropriateness of this or that method of composition are encountered both early and late in the dialogue, and the range of styles that are employed within it is remarkably varied. Hermias, the school of Syrianus, and later Neoplatonism more generally, were very much alive to the variations. Lysias’ speech is taken by the Neoplatonists to be an example of the ‘lean’ style; Olympiodorus turned to Socrates’ first speech for an example of diction inspired by nymphs; the palinode, which I shall not call ‘the myth’ owing to what I perceive to be considerable hesitation over the appropriateness of that word by Hermias himself, was taken rather to be an example of the rich and weighty style (216.6–14, cf. 11.11–20), the style usually held appropriate for elevated subject matter such as theology. The passage attracted widespread attention in late antiquity, particularly from the point where Plato introduces the divine chorus that views the realm above the heavens; indeed, all the indications are that the Phaedrus was generally seen as a literary masterpiece.