ABSTRACT
Plato famously quarrelled with the poets. It is strange, we think, because he was himself a poet, and evidently of great poetic sensibility. In this he differed from most philosophers, who have much to say about morals, politics, religion, metaphysics, logic, knowledge and meaning, but give to poetry barely a passing mention. But then most philosophers can afford to pass over poetry and art generally, for it means little to them. Philosophers tend to be grey men, tediously controverting what other philosophers have said or ordinary men think. Although a few can write well, for the most part they give the impression of having missed out on many of the experiences, and particularly the poetic and artistic experiences, of life. But not Plato. Not only was he a poet, but he was versed in literature, deeply responsive to it, and could not help writing well. He was susceptible to beauty. If in the end he wanted to banish the poets, it was because he knew their power. He was fighting himself. And the fact that the ancient quarrel was an internal one explains both the vehemence and the incoherence of his arguments.
