On January 22nd an employee with the Utah Transit Authority discovered a black 5 x 8.25 hardcover notebook in a compartment on the “Green Line” route of the light rail system. The contents of the suspicious notebook were incomprehensible to local authorities and was subsequently forwarded to the Cryptanalysis and Racketeering Records Unit in Quantico Virginia.
After rigorous scientific analysis it was determined that the handwriting was done by a single individual using both the right and left hands; each line of text systematically alternated between the two, leading the authorities to conclude the unknown author to be ambidextrous. Approximately 85% of the contents were written in Middle Egyptian using a unique but still recognizable set of hieroglyphs, while the other 15% was made up of characters from the modern Greek, Latin, and Arabic alphabets. Also present were transliterations from various other languages and dialects such as Old Church Slavonic, Tuscan, Castilian, Nahuatl, and Zapotec.
An official request for a comprehensive translation was made to the Smithsonian and after it was obtained, investigators deemed that the contents of the notebook were benign and that its origin was ostensibly linked to Cassius University. The notebook was sent back to the Utah Department of Justice whereupon the Attorney General Sean D. Reyes hand-delivered it to Dr. Scratch during one of their bi-monthly luncheons.
Upon further examination by a few unnamed faculty members of Cassius, a broad and overwhelming consensus was reached that the translation done by the Smithsonian was insufficient due to being overly formal and often too mechanical; a more dynamic translation was needed if anyone was to truly benefit from the study of the mysterious notebook. Such an undertaking seemed suited to the abilities of the undergraduates currently attending Cassius University and a call went out looking for student volunteers to join a committee.
The notebook was named Codex Nebrissensis and several dialogues from its pages were selected for publication. The first dialogue was left unnamed and was later christened ‘The Phaedrus’ by the translation committee.
At the time of this publication no one has claimed responsibility for the creation of Codex Nebrissensis and its origins still remain a mystery.
The Phaedrus
Location: Utah, Salt Lake City, Gilgal Sculpture Garden.
Cast: Dean Robbers, Reverend Kishkumen, Professor Peterson, Professor Phaedrus.
BOOK I
Reverend Kishkumen: When it comes to the art of interpretation, what Alfonsy would call “hermeneutics”, we must exercise a great deal of caution.
Dean Robbers: I never knew there was a cause for concern.
Reverend Kishkumen: Where Hermes is concerned, caution is always warranted.
Dean Robbers: Why should we care about Hermes?
Reverend Kishkumen: Why!?! He is the slayer of Argos! Comrade of feasts! He who is keen sighted, both glorious and terrible!
Dean Robbers: What!?!?!
Professor Phaedrus: I must concur, to even mar a mere representation of Hermes is to court disaster.
Dean Robbers: Am I to understand that the both of you believe in the existence of an ancient trickster god?
Reverend Kishkumen: Yes! Well, no. Not in a literal sense of course.
Dean Robbers: In what sense do you mean Reverend?
Reverend Kishkumen: Hermes is famously known as the patron of thieves, merchants, and other travelers, but he is also patron of interpreters. Hermes is above all cunning, but he can also be violent and so too can interpreters. Some call their art “hermeneutics” as if the word has nothing but innocent connotations.
Dean Robbers: Truth be told, I had never really considered hermeneutics to be a project begun in innocence.
Reverend Kishkumen: Your instincts were correct. Hermes is tied to cledonomancy, a divination that at first seems trivial but there is a secret sense that is only later revealed, often to the dismay of those whom the divination concerns. Interpreters can seem eminently reasonable when they give you the plain and obvious meaning of a text, but when they start giving oracular intimations of a text’s “true meaning” that has supposedly been obscured for generations, an interpretation whose genesis belongs to an age radically unlike the one the text arose from, well that takes not only violence, dare I say, but also a certain amount of subterfuge.
Professor Peterson: Present company excluded, I hope.
Reverend Kishkumen: Is Saturn in ascent!?! Your presence makes my soul leap Daniel, but I’m surprised to find you here.
Dean Robbers: Professor Peterson, I’m glad you decided to join us. Allow me to introduce Professor Phaedrus, he is our visiting scholar from the Aristotelian University of Thessaloniki.
Professor Peterson: Splendid! Welcome to the United States Professor Phaedrus, how are you enjoying your stay?
Professor Phaedrus: Aye! Now am I in Arden, the more fool I; when I was at home I was in a better place, but travelers must be content.
Professor Peterson: Not my favorite Beatles tune.
Dean Robbers: That was a bit of Shakespeare, my dear Professor..
Professor Peterson: Are you sure? Is it one of his lesser known works?
Professor Phaedrus: It is from ‘As You Like It’.
Professor Peterson: Truly a classic, I can’t believe I didn’t recognize it.
Reverend Kishkumen: Worry not Daniel, we are but mere mortals and we can be forgiven our little failures.
Professor Peterson: Seldom have truer words been spoken Reverend. Is Professor Phaedrus dealing with homesickness?
Professor Phaedrus: While Utah’s climate does agree with me, I’m afraid travel does not.
Professor Peterson: I’m sorry to hear such a report. I myself am a bit of a traveler.
Reverend Kishkumen: Odysseus himself would agree with you Professor Phaedrus, the man never really wanted to take part in the war against Troy. He pretended to be mad, you know? Took to plowing a rocky and barren patch of land to fool everyone into thinking his wits had abandoned him, but clever Palamedes put the infant Telemachus in the plow’s path and naturally Odysseus swerved to miss his son and his ruse was exposed.
Professor Peterson: Huh? Was that in the ‘Iliad’?
Dean Robbers: Oh, I believe that comes from the Spring Semester reading list for Cassius Freshmen. It is Hyginus, right?
Professor Phaedrus: Gaius Julius Hyginus! Pupil to Polyhistor and caretaker of the Library of Palatine Apollo!
Reverend Kishkumen: Yes, Hyginus of blessed memory. May his apiary always produce the finest honey.
Professor Peterson: Amen Reverend.
Dean Robbers: Why do you suppose Odysseus wanted to miss such an expedition?
Professor Phaedrus: Strange and dangerous things often happen while away from home. Odysseus was right to want to stay put in Ithaca.
Professor Peterson: The man did spend twenty years trying to get home, but surely we can’t use his travails as an exemplar for our own life?
Reverend Kishkumen: Plato tells us in his ‘Crito’ that Socrates never left Athens except for military campaigns. He seemed totally uninterested in life outside his own country.
Professor Peterson: The gadfly’s hodophobia was rewarded with execution.
Reverend Kishkumen: Indeed, not how I plan to shuffle off this mortal coil.
Professor Peterson: King Lear!
Dean Robbers: Hamlet.
Professor Peterson: I had meant to say that.
Professor Phaedrus: Plato wasn’t entirely truthful there. I seem to recall a time Socrates did venture outside the walls of Athens.
Reverend Kishkumen: Ah! You are right. Socrates was lured out of his usual urban haunts to hear a speech on the topic of erōs crafted by Lysias, one of the greatest orators to be preserved in history.
Professor Peterson: You said he was lured, Reverend?
Reverend Kishkumen: Yes Daniel, Socrates gets uncharacteristically lyrical about it, likening himself to a donkey plodding along, chasing a bit of dangled food that is forever just out of reach.
Professor Peterson: I suppose this is uncharacteristic of Socrates?
Dean Robbers: Socrates is often portrayed as the epitome of reason in Athens, even when he is mocked.
Professor Peterson: I can relate to that. Being mocked, not sure my stalkers consider me the epitome of anything but debased desires.
Dean Robbers: Don’t you find it interesting Professor Peterson, that Odysseus survives while abroad by the clever use of reason and yet when Socrates leaves the walls of Athens, reason seems to abandon him?
Reverend Kishkumen: By the beards of all the Prophets, you never cease to impress me with your mental acuity Dean. It justifies every cent of that six figure salary and more!
Professor Peterson: That is truly interesting Dean, when I was writing my dissertation at UCLA I came across…wait, six figures? Really?
Professor Phaedrus: Panegyric is not often used to describe the manner of Socratic discourse, but that would be a rare preserved instance. The man becomes positively lyrical!
Reverend Kishkumen: If you recall both the Protagoras and Gorgias gentlemen, we learned that Socrates is no lover of speeches, but as professor Phaedrus points out, he seems to make an exception for Lysias.
Professor Peterson: What am I supposed to recall?
Reverend Kishkumen: My apologies Daniel, 334c to 335c and 461d to 462a, respectively.
Professor Peterson: I…
Reverend Kishkumen: Texts Daniel! A potter cannot work without clay.
Professor Peterson: But what is the text?
Professor Phaedrus: The dialogue that mentions Socrates being lured outside of Athens is titled ‘Phaedrus’. Nominally, the dialogue is considered to be an examination of how love leads to philosophy.
Professor Peterson: Thank you! I must admit my expertise lies more with the Neoplatonism and Islam. To be frank, I don’t think I’ve ever really studied Plato at all.
Dean Robbers: Quite alright Professor Peterson. Does Socrates ever give an explanation as to why he underwent such a change?
Reverend Kishkumen: Yes! He is adamant that it is not his doing; that he is under the power of numpholēptos and enthousiazōn, they are the ones responsible for composing such magnificent orations.
Professor Peterson: Possessed by nymphs and gods, eh? What better inspiration for holding forth on erōs.
Professor Phaedrus: The second part of the dialogue is silent on erōs, despite it being such an issue of cosmic importance in the beginning. Why do you suppose that is, Reverend?
Reverend Kishkumen: I believe the true subject of the dialogue to be formally about rhetoric: it’s nature, the perusal of it, and the relation to philosophy. I suspect that the speeches are included because of what they reveal about the practice of rhetoric rather than what is revealed about the nature of erōs.
Professor Peterson: Ah! I know a thing or two about rhetoric. I had a regular column in Deseret News for over ten years.
Reverend Kishkumen: It was a worthy inclusion, to be sure Daniel.
Thus ends BOOK I
