/lit/ - Literature

>>20322166
This whole thread is teenagers posting groups of vaguely related books to adopt as fashions rather than for any genuine attempt at understanding reality. Don't expect anyone here to care about any systematic chronological approach to literature

any chronological list that divides into early-middle-late periods are philological inferences made after the fact. that being said the "Late" period works can be placed confidently and particularly the Laws being written last. this list isn't perfect but it's texts that don't have contested authorship and is pretty damn good. the most important thing really is to read vaguely in order, the order in which individual works are read within the periods doesn't particularly matter, just don't go reading the Republic first. It's also really important that you read the fucking Laws, it's the last thing he wrote at the height of his maturity and it shows Plato at his own sophisticated.

Just read everything that doesn't have contested authorship. There's an argument for excluding "less essential" texts but personally some of my favorite texts are the less essential ones (like Ion and Cratylus). Just be sure to read it in a (vaguely) chronological order

All chronological orderings are based on philological and stylometric analysis, the exception being the "late" texts which can be asserted confidently and particularly the Laws being written last. That being said pic related is alright. What matters the most isn't the order within the periods but that you progress from early > middle > late and read the Laws last. I also strongly recommend you read Eric Havelock's Preface to Plato (it's on libgen), maybe the most illuminating text on Plato for me personally.

pic related + read the introductory section on chronology. your goal is to recreate plato's consciousness and development in your own mind but you can't do that if you read shit out of order like a retard. most important is reading the laws last though

I literally just finished it 15 minutes ago and I gotta say the ending with er's myth is great. Plato took a very important step in "waking up" out of the greek preliterate perception of the world by directing poetry not towards imitation, but towards truth. The republic really isn't a work of genuine statecraft in my eyes. Yes its central concern is justice but at the root of this lies the question of education and the role of homeric poetry in the athenian educational apparatus. Very lucid work. Can't wait to read the Laws (although I gotta read a lot of other shit before I get there, pic related)

>>18163046
in order

why do we let people get away with read like 5 or so works of an author and then claiming they "read" that author. Do you only read All's Well and then claim you read Shakespeare or only read the Inferno and claim you read Dante? nonsense

Keep in mind that only the late era can be confidently assumed to be plato's "late period". The early and middle periods are inferences made philologically. We also know that The Laws is Plato's final work (and should not be skipped, it represents him at the height of his maturity). Ideally you read Homer, Hesiod, the Tragedians (Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides) and Aristophanes before reading Plato.

>>17982446
When you read an author their work isn't some magical box of knowledge that's just immanently available to you outside of time. You need to reconstruct the authors consciousness in your own mind. The influence of homer and the tragedians on plato isn't some abstract thing, he was EXPLICITLY fighting against them. And even then plato's own opinions and thoughts evolved in time. The republic is just in the middle period and you don't have context for what came before and after it. People on this board don't even read the very last thing he wrote at the HEIGHT OF HIS MATURITY: The Laws. This shit is a gargantuan task, not some list of books you check off to become smart.

>>17982450
maybe you don't like literature?

all of them in order.

why do we let people on this board get away with just reading a few "notable" dialogues and then pretend like they understand plato? you don't understand dante after only reading la vita nuova and the inferno. you don't understand shakespeare after reading king lear and macbeth. so why is plato the exception to this? nobody even reads the fucking laws when it's the culmination of his work.

>>17783495
Note that all chronological renderings of Plato's work are in large part inferences made either stylometrically or philologically with the exception of the final six works whose chronological placement as "late" dialogues, particularly The Laws being written last, can be made confidently ("late" dialogues: Politicus, Sophistes, Philebus, Critias, Timaeus and The Laws). Historicising your reading like this along with context of Plato's exposure to pythagoreanism and his political attempts in syracuse failing offers a much deeper and fuller reading of Plato than the "picking and choosing" of dialogues like you'll often find on this board. Reading the Laws last is particularly important and seldom does anyone actually read it.

I also recommend reading Eric Havelock's Preface to Plato for important historical (and media ecological) context. It's on libgen.

reading plato in the related order and I just finished phaedrus. I had started with the greeks and read homer + tragedians + aristophanes and decided I wanted to move on to virgil (and read his eclogues, georgics and the aeneid) but after finishing virgil I felt like I didn't have enough context for him and decided to go back and read plato. I was planning to read him and then move on to ovid but now im developing too many disparate literary interests and have no idea what to choose from. I kinda would like to read some history about the beginnings of classical greece, alexander's conquest and rome.

>>17710745
Plato's works supported homosexuality ala pederasty during his early and middle phases. When he wrote "laws" he was a degenerate old prude. Using "laws" to define what the Greeks felt about it is cherry-picking.

read him in order, and don't just stop at the republic. his final work, the laws, represents plato at the apex of his maturity. understand his exposure to pythagoreanism and how his political project in syracuse failing affected him intellectually. this can only be achieved by following his thought in a chronological way, and not by merely reading a 'best of' list. do the work.

you're supposed to read him in order anon. don't just read the popular works without having context of his intellectual development and the actual events in his life that influenced him, that's how you end up a midwit. THERE ARE NO SHORTCUTS. PIC RELATED.

>>17521775
Republic is for political theory. I'd suggest reading Phaedrus, Laches, Charmides, and the trial/death of Socrates.

Going to start reading Plato in the order of pic related. Anything I should know?

chronological order, also read Havelock's Preface to Plato

>>16739118
you should read all of it in order actually

>>16726390
>>16726990
also reading him in chronological order and understanding what events in his life had effects on his work (like his political ambitions in syracuse failing)

>>16703432
>>16703435
yeah plato talks about it, read him in order after you're done with homer, aeschylus, sophocles, euripides, aristophanes, and the presocratics.

read his works, chronologically, start to finish.