The intended reader of this volume may have little or no understanding of either philosopher. A. is careful to explain basic information such as distinguishing the character Socrates from the author Plato, and also that the notes gathered together in Will to Power were not intended by Nietzsche for publication. In addition, he introduces key philosophical problems and movements (such as the development of ancient and modern scepticism), as well as plenty of background material, which makes the work suitable for someone with little education in philosophy; and he frequently acknowledges common misperceptions of both philosophers in order to dispel them. But his inquiry goes further than most introductory books: given Plato's lasting influence over philosophy and Nietzsche's efforts to undermine traditional philosophy, the dialogue between the two is fecund ground for examining the nature of philosophy and the activities of the philosopher.

A. begins by exhorting his reader to ‘[t]hink of this book as a scholarly work not restricted to scholars’ (preface). There is little engagement with scholarly literature and other ‘traditional academic impedimenta’, though the endpoints are quite extensive. A. also invests himself in almost every page (‘it seems to me that’, ‘I like to imagine that if Nietzsche’). These are disarming techniques and take some time to get used to, but such directness instead of the typical impersonal style of academic writing is refreshing and helps to connect with the reader. However, one of the features of academic writing omitted from this book is an explicit plan of argument. Despite the division of material into chapters and sections, there is scant helpful signposting of his argument and authorial decisions are often made without informing his reader where the argument is heading. Considering this is an introductory work and the intended reader therefore has little or no knowledge of the subject, this can be quite disconcerting and requires a great deal of faith from the reader. This difficulty is compounded because A. examines topics that do not self-evidently belong together, and the shifts in the direction of his analysis can jar: for example, a discussion in the first chapter which moves from Nietzsche's examination of the problem of existential suffering to an observation of Plato's literary styles.

The book is divided into five chapters and each centres on a different thematic concern: ‘Art and Reason’, ‘Being’, ‘Becoming’, ‘Noble and Good’ and ‘Sophia and Philosophia’. The middle three chapters examine core philosophical arguments, and A. makes good use of the contrast between Plato, the philosopher of Being, and Nietzsche, the philosopher of becoming, in order to introduce Plato's thought and Nietzsche's overturning of Platonism. In addition, examining Plato in his own right allows A. critical distance from Nietzsche, which he uses to test some of Nietzsche's claims and to highlight where both philosophers occupy similar terrain. This approach is exemplified well in his analysis of Nietzsche's claims regarding the significance of the principle of equality to Christianity and also that Plato was ‘proleptically Christian’ (TI, ‘What I Owe the Ancients’ 2); A. offers an extensive account of Plato's aristocratic sensibilities as a way of revealing the similarity and subtle differences in Plato's and Nietzsche's ‘radical aristocratism’. Such an approach is very effective at illuminating the thought of both philosophers.

The novelty of A.'s book is his fascination with the men behind the works and although he is principally interested in the arguments in their works, he frequently draws attention to the writers themselves (to whom he refers as ‘artist-thinkers’); and this is the central concern of the first and final chapters. For example, he is critical of those who plunder Plato's works for philosophical argument and have nothing to say about the work itself, including its literary qualities. Such abuses of Plato's dialogues fail to understand his use of philosophy, which was greater than simply the arguments discussed within his texts: ‘it seems to me that the dialogues are something more than philosophy, and that Plato was engaged in a pursuit that he ranked higher than philosophy … I would say that Plato transcended philosophy and attained wisdom’ (pp. 168–9). The relation between philosophy and wisdom is a fascinating line of inquiry, and A.'s analysis includes much that is stimulating, but unfortunately it is not developed further and A. reiterates his modest intentions for the work: ‘I intend only to call attention to some aspects of Plato's activity as a creative author, to prompt my readers to imagine Plato as something other than either an oral dialectician or a literate teacher. Plato was a philosopher, and his practice of philosophy included thinking about and engaging in artistic activities of the sort I have just gone through … I mean to emphasize Plato's artistry’ (p. 161).

Considering the book's ambitious scope, it is not surprising that the analysis is sometimes stretched too far and difficult ideas are passed over without explanation. For example, references to ‘Prime Matter in Aristotelian terms’ and ‘the recurrence of the small man, the sick man’ in Chapter 2 will be quite daunting to a reader with little or no knowledge of either, though perhaps the striking feature of the book is how rarely this happens. One disappointment is A.'s interpretation of Nietzsche's concept of the eternal recurrence which is given a section of its own in the chapter on ‘Being’: A.'s analysis is characteristically concise and lucid, and provides a good introduction. However, for pedagogical reasons he restricts his analysis of the eternal recurrence to its function as an expression of nihilism (p. 79). The hard work of explaining what it means to say that ‘Time repeats itself’ is left to Paul Loeb, and A. references, rather than summarises, his interpretation. Quite reasonably, A. periodically repeats the dictum that he is not presenting ‘the reading’ of these philosophers, but rather an introduction into the thought of both; yet, in this case, this difficult concept warrants more attention to explain Nietzsche's considerable interest in it. Nor does he engage with notable figures in Nietzsche's works such as the free spirits, the philosophers of the future or the Übermensch.

It might be expected that A. is only interested in Plato in so far as he is relevant to a study of Nietzsche, but this is not the case and Plato does not appear in a supporting role. A. is a careful reader of Plato, and weaves seamlessly through different dialogues in order to find consistencies of thought, as opposed to attributing an argument to Plato on the basis of a single claim. Although there is scattered discussion of the Laws and, briefly, the method of collection and division in Plato's later ontology, A. is mostly interested in the Republic and other middle works. His knowledge of Nietzsche is equally impressive, and he offers a coherent account of Nietzsche's philosophy without oversimplifying it.

The ambition of the book should not be understated: A. has taken on two giants of philosophy and brought them together in an introductory account of both. In doing so, he raises many questions without always offering answers, but his principal aim is neither to give an account of ‘the truth’ of each philosopher, nor to educate the reader in the history of philosophy. This book's ambition lies in its pedagogical task of animating and opening up the thought and works of each philosopher in such a vivid way that the reader is encouraged to engage critically with them, rather than, as might be the case for the novice reader, to treat them as historical works about which little new can be said. It is for this reason that this excellent and intriguing book should be recommended not only to anyone interested in Plato and Nietzsche, but also to anyone interested in philosophy.