Abstract

Nietzsche claimed, in The Birth of Tragedy, that the Platonic dialogues are the lifeboat on which Socrates rescues older poetry, only to finish off comedy. This article contests that claim. Distinguishing comedy (a mode organized around to geloion, whose object Plato himself defines in the Philebus as self-ignorance) from irony (a two-level device of meaning), it argues that Socratic irony in Plato is comic in a precise threefold sense: genealogically, as the inheritance of the eirōn-mask from the Aristophanic Clouds; structurally, wherever the dialogues frame it for staged laughter; and thematically, as the instrument of the laughing exposure of doxosophia. Drawing on Kierkegaard’s reading of the Socratic maieutic as ‘indirect communication’ and Vlastos’s concept of ‘complex irony,’ the article offers a close reading of Alcibiades’ speech in the Symposium within the generic frame Plato himself names at 222d: the satyr-play, ‘tragedy at play,’ in which tragic material is held inside a laughing form. The speech’s mythological imagery (Silenus, Marsyas, Corybants, Sirens) carries a coordinated dark sub-text that reverses its overt meaning—the satyric signature, not a departure from the comic. Against Vlastos, who locates pedagogical failure in Alcibiades’ self-deception, and Lane, who finds complex irony’s deliberate indeterminacy ethically indefensible, the article proposes a meta-ironic resolution: Plato stages both positions simultaneously, performing at the authorial level the very pharmakon-logic the speech describes—a seriocomic philosophical method grounded in the mythological ambivalence of the theatre of Dionysus.

IPC Classification

Keywords