Plato spoke of an ancient quarrel between poetry and philosophy (Republic 607b), in which the philosopher is one who searches after truth, while the poet recognises there to be no truth. B.'s ambitious work traces the history of the ancient quarrel between philosophy and poetry in the Western tradition. It examines the various ways in which philosophers have approached poetry, ranging from Plato to the contemporary work of the intellectual Mikhail Bakhtin. Through his use of the word ‘quarrel’, B. indicates that the relationship between poetry and philosophy has always been contentious but he demonstrates that this quarrel has been important in shaping post-classical Western philosophical thought. B. argues that even philosophers who rejected poetry used poetic imagery to help define their conceptions of philosophy.
In his first chapter, B. discusses the position of Plato and Socrates. He focuses on a passage from Plato in The Seventh Letter, The Republic, describing Socrates' exile of the poets from the city, in order to create ‘a new poetry’ in the service of philosophy. The episode sets the stage for both sides of the debate, underscoring B.'s idea that even philosophers who despised poetry viewed it as an important, even dangerous, phenomenon. Plato himself was initially a poet who, influenced by Socrates, turned away from poetry in favour of philosophy. While Plato knew poetry's power first-hand, Socrates still perceived poetry as deceptive, consisting of nothing but myths. In this passage, B. demonstrates how the quarrel between poetry and philosophy found its first footing in Plato's work, where most of Western philosophy originates.
B. then discusses the position of Aristotle, who held a less hostile view towards poets and their work. Rather than dismiss poetry as dangerous, Aristotle concerned himself with ways in which the literary mode could be used as a tool for ethical inquiry. Aristotle moved away from Socrates' view of poetry as a dangerous influence requiring suppression towards a new understanding of poetry as a tool that could be used by philosophers.
B. continues on to consider Plotinus and Augustine. Plotinus' influence on a number of poets is explored, including Goethe, Samuel T. Coleridge, Augustine and Dante. Augustine recognised the power of poetry but feared that poetry might communicate demonic messages rather than messages of the divine. He ultimately came to view philosophy as a corrective measure to mitigate the spiritual danger perpetuated by poets and poetry.
B. also examines the work of Boethius and Dionysius, both of whom recognised power and appeal in poetry, but viewed it as harmful unless tempered by philosophical thought. Boethius considered philosophy a comfort that counteracted the harsh but necessary realities exposed by Lady Philosophy. While these two thinkers were less hostile in their approach towards poetry, they still viewed it as morally inferior to philosophy.
The next thinker explored by B., Thomas Aquinas, was a philosopher influenced by all those previously mentioned. Like Augustine, Aquinas was a trained poet, but unlike Augustine did not consider poetry an expression of the divine or demonic. Aquinas did not believe that poets were possessed or that they communicated ideas that were derived from outside themselves. Instead, he believed that the poetic expression of language and metaphor was entirely human and that the quality of a poet's work lay in his own grasp of the poetic process.
In the sixth chapter, B. addresses the philosopher Giambattista Vico, who divided history into two different storylines: the history of the Hebrews, and the history of the Gentiles. He considered the Hebrews' history sacred and devoted most of his attention to the history of the Gentiles. Vico claimed that the first human beings spoke the language of poetry and that philosophers helped this language to grow over time. Through irony and the critical question the philosophers transformed our relationship to human institutions and to the divine. Here, B. examines Vico's work The New Science, in which myth and poetry become equal to divine revelation.
B. then examines Kant, whose work The Critique of Judgment is focused on poetry. Kant believed that poetry carried an importance beyond that of other forms of writing, but did not believe that poets spoke on behalf of the divine. He believed that the genius of poets was human, of which they did not necessarily have control. Kant considered poetry to be something gifted by nature and, although not divine, an expressive modality offering deeper insight than regular language.
B. explains how Kant's students, Johann G. Hamann and Johann G. von Herder, were critical of this position, believing that Kant was mistaken in denying the divine aspect of poetry. In contrast to Kant's belief that poetry originated through nature rather than the divine, Hegel believed that it was both. According to Hegel, ‘the realm of poetry includes human ideas, deeds, actions, fates, and the divine rule of the universe’. B. points out that, according to Hegel's definition, the realms of poetry and philosophy overlap almost completely. However, Hegel made the distinction that philosophy allows for critical questioning and analysis of the content of poetry, and this critical faculty is what differentiates philosophy from poetry and makes philosophy necessary for deeper understanding.
Following Hegel, B. discusses Kierkegaard, a philosopher who was critical of poetry and like some earlier philosophers viewed the medium as a threat to religion. He believed that poetry was a provocative distraction from a life of faith, which he viewed as the more desirable course. Wilhelm Dilthey, whom B. discusses next, saw the appeal in both religion and metaphysics, although ultimately he did not find either of them to be believable. To Dilthey, the human spirit longed for meaning, regardless of whether or not it could be found, and poetry provided the best expression of this longing.
B. explores Nietzsche and Heidegger in the penultimate chapter. He explains how Nietzsche viewed poetry in its artistic form, rather than philosophy, as the way towards advancement. Heidegger, one of the most important interpreters of Nietzsche's work during the twentieth century, expanded on this idea. Heidegger believed that philosophy's most important task was to probe into the question of ‘being’ itself and poetry provided essential ‘hints’ that could direct this questioning.
In the final chapter, B. explores Mikhail Bakhtin's work on the novelist Dostoevsky. Bakhtin argues that poetry speaks with a single voice, and that philosophy, through its questioning and scepticism, allows different languages and ideas to interact with one another. Bhaktin saw Dostoevsky's novel as a place where poetry and philosophy could intersect.
While B. acknowledges that his book could have included many other thinkers and that the length of the book could easily have been doubled or tripled, the volume still provides a fascinating exploration of the tension between the two disciplines of poetry and philosophy. While B. provides profound analysis as a sophisticated reader of literary texts, the book fails to formulate and answer any specific question. The author favours a chronological literary approach, looking at the various thinkers' thought instead of responding to any specific question about their epistemological, religious and political implications in the history of this debate. None the less, the book will be of great assistance to those working on ancient philosophy and the history of Western philosophy.
