The nature of poetry and the proper way of reading it. A modern look at Plutarch’s pedagogical views in ‘How to study poetry’

Abstract

Plutarch considers that the texts of the classical tradition with which young people come into contact from a very young age have many flaws, in terms of the ideology, the moral issues they deal with, the standards they project, and the decision-making they demonstrate. His admission of this is also the reason that leads him to devote a large part of his treatise to investigating the nature of poetry and how readers and teachers can correct, evaluate, and make positive use of the moral phenomena found in it. For him, poetry has a purely moral–pedagogical character as it exerts a direct influence on the human soul and mind. This last statement of his is confirmed in an undeniable way in practice, as the entire educational world recognises literature as the most suitable means of education and training. In ‘How to study poetry’, the philosopher does not want to moralise or manipulate the reader’s thinking, but rather give them the opportunity to decide for themselves the actions they will take to achieve the ultimate reading pleasure and benefit. In the present article, his pedagogical concepts meet with modern literary theories in a unique way, which makes reading them an interesting process.

Introduction

Can the teaching of poetry offer a beneficial contribution to the education of children? Plutarch’s answer is affirmative, whilst his insights on the matter retain their relevance in the contemporary pedagogical framework. His focus lies on poetry and the manner in which the young ought to study it, thereby becoming suitably equipped for their subsequent engagement with philosophy. His educational scheme does not refer to an imaginary situation, but to the real life of the youth of his time. His overriding concern is the moral development of the young readers of the nobility and their transformation into ‘useful’ citizens exhibiting a special interest and regard for philosophy. Being aware of and familiar with the views of Plato, who mostly rejects the educational value of poetry, ¹ and Aristotle, who accepts it as an imitative art, ² Chaeroneas approaches the subject in an alternative way, demonstrating that not only do literary readings bring pleasure to young students, but they can prove to be beneficial to them as well. In fact, he tries to reconcile and synthesise the opposing ideas of these two great philosophers (on this particular issue) by establishing a dialectical collaboration with them. He himself integrates poetry in his educational curriculum, as he believes that young people, along with the enjoyment they derive from the stories, can learn how to distinguish good from evil, as well as how to successfully seek out everything that is useful and beneficial to them (Pervo, 2016).

The nature of poetry

The central idea of his treatise is that poetry is the most appropriate teaching medium that teachers of all levels can use to teach their students, in an enjoyable way, basic virtues such as courage, temperance and self-restraint, justice, and wisdom. In this rationale, aspiring to emphasise the importance of the epic tradition and justify its utility in education, he endeavours to define poetry whilst focussing on those elements that make it suitable for the development of children. In his approach, he neither devises a conception that diverges from the conventional understanding of poetry, nor does he seek to attribute innovative characteristics to it to justify the genre’s suitability for the young. On the contrary, his advice follows the path of classical pedagogy, and especially of the Peripatetic school of philosophy, which recognises poetry as an imitative art, bearing similarities to painting (ὑπογράφοντες τὴν ποιητικὴν ὅτι μιμητικὴ τέχνη καὶ δύναμίς ἐστιν ἀντίστροφος τῇ ζῳγραφίᾳ, 17f). Subsequently, he accepts and recognises its weaknesses, such as its capacity to ‘deceive’ the ones who will be enchanted by it and believe in its fictitious nature (οὐ γὰρ ἅπτεται τὸ ἀπατηλὸν αὐτῆς ἀβελτέρων κομιδῇ καὶ ἀνοήτων», αὗται πεπονθότων εἰσὶ καὶ προεαλωκότων ὑπὸ δόξης καὶ ἀπάτης, 15d, 17d). He explicitly proclaims that anyone who approaches epic poetry with the proper teaching method and evaluates its content will become wiser and more mature due to his involvement with it. (μᾶλλον ὀρθῷ τινι λογισμῷ παριστάντες καὶ καταδέοντες, τὴν κρίσιν, ὅπως μὴ παραφέρηται τῷ τέρποντι πρὸς τὸ βλάπτον, ἀπευθύνωμεν καὶ παραφυλάττωμεν, 15d). The extraordinary quality of poetry is its ability to represent reality itself in a unique and at the same time vivid way, and as a result, to deliver life lessons to those who study it (τὴν δ’ ὁμοιότητα τοῦ ἀληθοῦς οὐ προλείπει, τῆς μιμήσεως ἐν τῷ πιθανῷ τὸ ἀγωγὸν ἐχούσης, 25b–c). This is the point where the author’s most significant argument lies against those who defamed poetry. In ‘How to study poetry’, poetry is presented as the art of verity, depicting reality with a unique and vibrant quality. Its objective is not the idealisation, but rather the use of language for the realistic depiction of human experience. It presents the imperfections of human nature exactly as they are and illustrates – in writing – in a realistic way the social and psychological situations experienced by humankind. In this sense we must appreciate its value in relation to its ability to resemble the model, and not so much in the moral perfection of the characters and heroes it projects (ἡδόμεθα καὶ θαυμάζομεν οὐχὡς καλὸν ἀλλ´ ὡς ὅμοιον. Οὐσίᾳ μὲν γὰρ οὐ δύναται καλὸν γενέσθαι τὸ αἰσχρόν· ἡ δὲ μίμησις, ἄντε περὶ φαῦλον ἄντε περὶ χρηστὸν ἐφίκηται τῆς ὁμοιότητος, ἐπαινεῖται, 18a) (Westway, 1922). This basic function of poetry is supported by many literary theorists, who try to define it using the notion of imitation as a theoretical tool. Barthes, for example, considers that the main advantage of literature is its representational power as, through literature, the author is enabled to address reality and revive it in a unique way. His opinion is that poetry gives us the capability to express in words the world that surrounds us and to learn things about it (Barthes, 1979). In addition, if we refer to recent literary studies, we will encounter other characteristics attributed to its nature, such as polysemy (the capacity of words to hold multiple meanings), the eurhythmy (the presence of an agreeable rhythm) of its form, intertextuality, and the use of the imaginary element with the freedom and possibilities it provides to the reader (Frydaki, 2003). Many of the aforementioned characteristics are highlighted by Plutarch in his attempt to examine literary discourse from an ontological view, taking into account the role of myth and fiction, whilst more characteristics are invoked in this text as a nuanced defence of the artistic discourse (Varzeas, 2019). This fact demonstrates both the validity of Plutarch’s views on poetry and the profound knowledge and acuity of intellect which distinguish him.

Although the method of employing poetry in teaching is not the same as it used to be a few decades ago, literary texts are still included in the curriculum as a channel of moral values and a reservoir of information to be explored and processed. In the modern era the young reader is expected to develop grammatical and linguistic skills through the studying of literature, whilst literature may also foster the development of the reader’s attitudes, beliefs, sensitivity, and imagination through aesthetic cultivation. In addition, by making good use of the possibilities presented to them through the study of the artistic discourse, found in prose and in verse, they adopt a consciously critical attitude towards the complex problems of daily life, develop communication skills, and begin to recognise and understand their national and cultural identity whilst at the same time cultivating democratic ethos (Ermogenous and Pandela, 2013).

Plutarch acknowledges in this treatise that ancient literature has an impact on the personality of young people and consequently can influence their conduct and overall trajectory in life (καὶ ταῦτα δὴ τοῖς νέοις ὑποδεικνύοντες οὐκ ἐάσομεν φορὰν πρὸς τὰ φαῦλα γίγνεσθαι τῶν ἠθῶν ἀλλὰ τῶν βελτιόνων ζῆλον καὶ προαίρεσιν, εὐθὺς τοῖς μὲν τὸ ψέγειν τοῖς δὲ τὸ ἐπαινεῖν ἀποδιδόντες, 27e–f). More specifically, he states that even negative role models and reprehensible actions can make young students wiser by dissuading them from inappropriate and unwanted behaviors (ἡ γὰρ τῶν φαύλων διάθεσις ἔργων καὶ μίμησις ἂν προσαποδῷ τὴν συμβαίνουσαν αἰσχύνην καὶ βλάβην τοῖς ἐργασαμένοις, ὠφέλησεν οὐκ ἔβλαψε τὸν ἀκροώμενον, 20 b). The young reader, seeing that such acts could only be harmful to those who committed them, eventually resolves to comply with the virtuous conduct and consciously chooses to reject any improper behaviour. Thus, through the depiction of real-life situations, the author employs literary characters for the benefit of readers, whilst simultaneously implementing an educational program for the moral advancement of society. A fundamental aspect of Plutarch’s worldview is the belief that all individuals possess an inherent potential for both virtuous and vicious conduct and that no person is perpetually flawless or successful. Consequently, the mixed qualities of kindness and benevolence or of evil and malice must never be omitted from poetry, as they are invariably present in our own lives (Hunter and Russel, 2011). Central to Plutarch’s pedagogical framework is his concern with how young people can attain moral excellence through the cultivation of virtues such as moderation, magnanimity, and self-awareness. Plutarch firmly believes that poetry instils kindness, generosity, and prudence, elements of vital importance for moral growth, spiritual advancement, and psychological maturation (δύο δὴ περιγίγνεται μεγάλα τοῖς τῶν ποιημάτων ἐπιμελῶς ἐθιζομένοις ἀκούειν, τὸ μὲν εἰς μετριότητα, μηδενὶ τύχην ἐπαχθῶς καὶ ἀνοήτως ὀνειδίζειν, τὸ δ´ εἰς μεγαλοφροσύνην, αὐτοὺς χρησαμένους τύχαις μὴ ταπεινοῦσθαι μηδὲ ταράττεσθαι, 35d). Although the possibility of teaching ethics on a theoretical level has been strongly contested nowadays, just as Plutarch suggests here, there are many contemporary views that hold that teaching itself is inherently a moral process and therefore it is possible to transmit the basic principles of life in one way or another through the lessons and activities of the broader school environment. Good behaviour and moral improvement are taught both inside and outside of school. A ‘preacher’ of morality can potentially be a parent, class teacher, friend, political figure, virtuous figure in society, or a person who holds authority or is distinguished for their moral standing.

In addition, Chaironeas argues that poetry offers mental and spiritual pleasure to those who read it, and as a result, it educates and soothes their souls (οὕτω δὴ καὶ ποιητικῇ πολὺ μὲν τὸ ἡδὺ καὶ τρόφιμον νέου ψυχῆς ἔνεστιν, 15c). The entertaining aspect of poetry and language in verse has been recognised by many modern writers such as Eliot, Valéry, and Empiricus. The first described poetry as a superior, refined amusement; the second as the development of an exclamation; and the third as a perpetual ‘journey’ that has no end (Anagnostopoulos, 1995). Research has shown that reading literary texts that evoke pleasant feelings in the child combined with the use of innovative pedagogical approaches and methods and playful activities that attract their attention and interest have the effect of instilling a fondness for reading, which is very important for future academic careers (Katsiki-Givalos et al., 2008). The question that then arises from the abovementioned discussion about poetry is correlated to the literary preferences of young people and their choices when it comes to what they like to listen to. It is taken for granted and considered as completely normal that young people enjoy reading texts that amuse them without paying any particular attention to the benefit that a beautiful literary journey can offer them:

ὅτι δὲ τῶν ἐν φιλοσοφίᾳ λεγομένων οἱ σφόδρα νέοι τοῖς μὴ δοκοῦσι φιλοσόφως μηδ´ ἀπὸ σπουδῆς λέγεσθαι χαίρουσι μᾶλλον καὶ παρέχουσιν ὑπηκόους ἑαυτοὺς καὶ χειροήθεις, δῆλόν ἐστιν ἡμῖν. Οὐ γὰρ μόνον τὰ Αἰσώπεια μυθάρια καὶ τὰς ποιητικὰς ὑποθέσεις ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸν Ἄβαριντὸν Ἡρακλείδου καὶ τὸν Λύκωνα τὸν Ἀρίστωνος διερχόμενοι καὶ τὰ περὶ τῶν ψυχῶν δόγματα μεμιγμένα μυθολογίᾳ μεθ´ ἡδονῆς ἐνθουσιῶσι, 14e.

This observation seems to be the starting point of his reflection on the purposes of poetry and how to utilise it in the teaching practice. Thus, at one point in his treatise, he refers to the content that a literary text should have to be suitable for children, but also to the criteria by which authors ought to choose the subject matter of their works. It is his belief that malicious characters, the villains, and their foul deeds, create depraved, corrupt morals, just as fables stir the soul of the reader:

ἐν μὲν γὰρ τοῖς περὶ τῆς Ἀφροδίτης διδάσκει τοὺς προσέχοντας, ὅτι μουσικὴ φαύλη καὶ ᾄσματα πονηρὰ καὶ λόγοι μοχθηρὰς ὑποθέσεις λαμβάνοντες ἀκόλαστα ποιοῦσιν ἤθη καὶ βίους ἀνάνδρους καὶ ἀνθρώπους τρυφὴν καὶ μαλακίαν καὶ γυναικοκρασίαν ἀγαπῶντας εἵματά τ´ ἐξημοιβὰ λοετρά τε θερμὰ καὶ εὐνάς. Διὸ καὶ τὸν Ὀδυσσέα τῷ κιθαρῳδῷ προστάττοντα πεποίηκεν. Ἀλλ´ ἄγε δὴ μετάβηθι καὶ ἵππου κόσμον ἄεισον, καλῶς ὑφηγούμενος τὸ παρὰ τῶν φρονίμων καὶ νοῦν ἐχόντων χρῆναι λαμβάνειν τοὺς μουσικοὺς καὶ ποιητικοὺς τὰς ὑποθέσεις. Ἐνδὲ τοῖς περὶ τῆς Ἥρας ἄριστα τὴν ἀπὸ φαρμάκων καὶ γοητείας καὶ μετὰ δόλου πρὸς τοὺς ἄνδρας ὁμιλίαν καὶ χάριν ἔδειξεν οὐ μόνον ἐφήμερον καὶ ἁψίκορον καὶ ἀβέβαιον οὖσαν, ἀλλὰ καὶ μεταβάλλουσαν εἰς ἔχθραν καὶ ὀργήν, ὅταν τὰ τῆς ἡδονῆς ἀπομαρανθῇ, 19f–20b.

Still, how can a poem capture the interest of young people and fascinate them by captivating their minds and by drawing them into the realm of its story? Plutarch does not hesitate to suggest some clever ways that can maintain the attention of teenagers so that they get the best possible reading experience. First of all, he believes that the young reader should not under any circumstances become aware of the development of the plot or the end of the story in advance, since this would be detrimental both to the progression of the lesson and to their willingness to continue being involved in the learning process. In addition, regarding the content of the work, he believes that it is a positive technique to create intense emotional outbursts and changes in the students through the alternation of pleasant or unpleasant situations that will keep them alert and cause tension and turmoil in their hearts (τὸ γὰρ ἐμπαθὲς καὶ παράλογον καὶ ἀπροσδόκητον, ᾧ πλείστη μὲν ἔκπληξις ἕπεται πλείστη δὲ χάρις, αἱ μεταβολαὶ παρέχουσι τοῖς μύθοις· τὸ δ´ ἁπλοῦν ἀπαθὲς καὶ ἄμουσον. Ὅθεν οὔτε νικῶντας ἀεὶ πάντα ποιοῦσι τοὺς αὐτοὺς οὔτ´ εὐημεροῦντας οὔτε κατορθοῦντας, 25d). A monotonous text with no twists and turns in the story will surely be ignored by young and demanding readers who are ‘thirsty’, eager to experience adventure and intense emotions. The charm of poetry lies in the variety of its themes and the sharp, unexpected turns of the lives of its heroes. Even a virtuous character may in the course of the plot fall into errors and succumb to their passions. Young people should know this well and take nothing for granted when they listen to their teacher read a poem to them (Konstan, 2004).

The teaching of poetry

In his present treatise, Plutarch presents in a succinct, concise, and at the same time thorough manner instructions by which young people can utilise poetry to their advantage. For him, poetry is an equivalent to a remedy, an entity, and a form of art with ambiguous powers (Zadorojny, 2002). Therefore, being aware of the pitfalls that are hidden in its ‘bosom’ and the difficulties that can be encountered by the young recipients of the various narratives, he advises them to enjoy it within a strict framework and with clear objectives (οὐκ ἔλαττον δὲ τὸ ταρακτικὸν καὶ παράφορον, ἂν μὴ τυγχάνῃ παιδαγωγίας ὀρθῆς ἡ ἀκρόασις, 15c). Neither does he wish to downplay nor degrade the pedagogical value of poetry; on the contrary, he argues that, with proper guidance, young readers can gradually learn how to avoid the dangers encountered in poets’ verses and to seek within them those ingredients that will enable them to create a wonderful character. He himself at the beginning of his treatise expresses the opinion that young people need to receive more suggestions and advice when they try to learn something new during their time at school rather than when they are involved in their extracurricular activities and the groups they choose to spend their free time with time (ἐπεὶ τοί νυν οὔτ´ ἴσως δυνατόν ἐστιν οὔτ´ ὠφέλιμον ποιημάτων ἀπείργειν τὸν τηλικοῦτον ἡλίκος οὑμός τε τὸ νῦν Σώκλαρός ἐστι καὶ ὁσὸς Κλέανδρος, εὖ μάλα παραφυλάττωμεν αὐτούς, ὡς ἐν ταῖς ἀναγνώσεσι μᾶλλον ἢ ταῖς ὁδοῖς παιδαγωγίας δεομένους, 15a). In this way, on the one hand, he wants to make his wider audience become aware of the importance of education through studying and reading, and on the other hand, to emphasise that the teacher should be placed at the very centre of the teaching method, being responsible to monitor, encourage, and guide the student throughout their schooling. At first glance, we would say that Plutarch, through his didactic suggestions, underlines the importance and gives a higher priority to the teacher and not to the student. But it is not so. We cannot say or infer that the teaching method he proposes to us is purely or entirely teacher-centred; on the contrary, he places the student at its centre, a fact which is demonstrated by the potential offered to them to be critically involved in the process of listening to literary texts and to freely express their opinions (ἐπεὶ βλαβήσεται μεγάλα δοκιμάζων πάντα καὶ τεθηπώς, 25e). After all, the overriding concern of the person who guides a school class intellectually and morally is to follow with interest the activity of their students, to encourage dialogue, and to give them the possibility to choose the way they want to work and not to impose their own way of thinking on their students (Kossyvaki, 2006). Plutarch views education as a triangular relationship involving the teacher, the student, and the text. According to his perspective, the accurate interpretation of a text is the responsibility of both the student and the teacher (Pervo, 2016).

Therefore, the first thing that the philosopher advises young people to do when reading a poem is to learn to look for its useful elements and derive profit from it, neglecting the personal pleasure that may arise from the vivid nature of the content of an exquisite literary masterpiece (ἔτι δὲ μᾶλλον ἐν ταῖς ἀκροάσεσιν καὶ ἀναγνώσεσιν ἐθίζειν, ὥσπερ ὄψῳ χρωμένους μετρίως τῷ τέρποντι, τὸ χρήσιμον ἀπ´ αὐτοῦ καὶ τὸ σωτήριον διώκειν, 14f) (Jażdżewska, 2019). It is important for the student, along with listening to a beautiful passage, to absorb, similar to a sponge, the information that will really serve them in later life and eliminate the weaknesses of their character. Modern pedagogy recognises that literary reading, in addition to the individual enjoyment and aesthetic emotion it offers students, is also a highly constructive activity that contributes both to the development of their critical thinking and to their attempt to know themselves and the world that surrounds them. At the same time, it allows them to envisage life beyond all trivialities by giving them the opportunity to imagine it and change it according to the set of special characteristics that comprise their inner emotional and spiritual world (Anagnostopoulou, 2008). In this light, we understand that the approach to literary texts in school must be done carefully and with specific planning, since it is very likely that inexperienced young people will lose their balance and be disoriented between the useful and the pleasant that are inherent elements of poetry, and end up being mere consumers of books rather than thinking readers. Therefore, he explains to us that to be able to achieve our main reading goal, which is none other than the completion and the fulfilment of our individuality from a moral point of view, we must first detach ourselves from false and useless situations (πολλὰ διακρούσεται τῶν οὐκ ἀληθῶς οὐδ´ ὠφελίμως λεγομένων. Ταῦτα μὲν οὖν ἀβλαβῆ παρέξει τὴν τῶν ποιημάτων ἀκρόασιν, 28d) that we encounter in the texts we read and reject the vulgar and crude expressions used by poets (ἀλλὰ βδελυττέ σθωτοὺς λόγους μᾶλλον ἢ τὰ ἔργα τῆς ἀκολασίας, 28a). It is also important, according to his rationale, to treat with caution and even more circumspection the words of great men and individuals of unquestionable authority, as they appear in the written language, since the general approval of an opinion is no evidence of its correctness (ὁ δὲ πάντα θαυμάζων καὶ πᾶσιν ἐξοικειούμενος καὶ καταδεδουλωμένος τῇ δόξῃ τὴν κρίσιν ὑπὸ τῶν ἡρωϊκῶν ὀνομάτων, ὥσπερ οἱ τὴν Πλάτωνος ἀπομιμούμενοι κυρτότητα καὶ τὴν Ἀριστοτέλους τραυλότητα, λήσεται πρὸς πολλὰ τῶν φαύλων εὐχερὴς γενόμενος, 26b).

Plutarch does not trust the vague, elusive, and effortless judgements of the masses for this reason and exhorts the young to examine a subject from all sides and exhaustively. In his opinion, the non-acceptance of authority is the prerequisite for the activation of thought and also the starting point for the acquisition of new knowledge and skills. His last admission is directly connected to the reflective approach to the teaching practice in the modern school, where students, in their effort to create a personal learning culture, face knowledge critically through the practical application of exploratory forms of teaching. The ultimate goal of this particular teaching method is to encourage students to think about the content of the teaching, to search for alternative answers to various questions, to avoid one-dimensional approaches, and to keep their thinking free and independent (Kassotakis and Flouris, 2006). The same applies when the author encourages young people to become investigators, to make assumptions, and to look for people’s motives behind and beyond the words or actions they hear (ἐπὶ πᾶσι τοίνυν καὶ τὸ τὴν αἰτίαν ἑκάστου τῶν λεγομένων ἐπιζητεῖν χρήσιμόν ἐστιν, 28a–b) (Duff, 2023). The search for such a justification, that is, the whys and hows of everything, clearly shows that Plutarch’s first and foremost concern is the cultivation of the student’s critical thinking and his active participation in the lesson during the study–listening of poetry. A central idea of his writing is that only the thinking listeners and readers of poetry can be led to wisdom (Konstan, 2004). But how can we practically apply the lessons we learn from literary books?

According to the author, a good technique is to extend the knowledge gained from reading a poem to other similar or identical situations that we encounter in our daily life, proceeding to generalisations which in turn will lead us to come to conclusions concerning the universal rules of life:

τὴν δ´ ἐπὶ πλέον τῶν λεγομένων χρῆσιν ὑπέδειξεν ὀρθῶς ὁ Χρύσιππος, ὅτι δεῖ μετάγειν καὶ διαβιβάζειν ἐπὶ τὰ ὁμοειδῆ τὸ χρήσιμον», «οὕτω καὶ λόγον κοινοῦν καὶ δημοσιεύειν τὴν χρείαν δυνάμενον οὐ χρὴ περιορᾶν ἑνὶ πράγματι συνηρτημένον ἀλλὰ κινεῖν ἐπὶ πάντα τὰ ὅμοια, καὶ τοὺς νέους ἐθίζειν τὴν κοινότητα συνορᾶν καὶ μεταφέρειν ὀξέως τὸ οἰκεῖον, ἐν πολλοῖς παραδείγμασι ποιουμένους μελέτην καὶ ἄσκησιν ὀξυηκοΐας, 34b–c.

This advice of his alludes to the classic inductive approach to teaching and the pedagogical principles of Decroly, ³ who argued that the purpose of school is not only to teach reading, writing, and academics nor to make children word machines, but to help them live their lives and humanise them (Gallien and Fonteyne, 1937). Consequently, an additional piece of advice from Plutarch regarding the correct study of ancient texts also has to do with the attitude that readers should take in the face of the wrong standards put forward by poets. He himself informs us that it is unwise to try to morally restore the heroes of the plays by correcting their dishonest actions with our own false interpretations and pretexts. Ultimately, their natural aptitude and talents will lead them to conquer the notions of the just and the right:

μηδὲν οὖν ἐπαινεῖν ἐθιζέσθω τοιοῦτον ὁ νέος, μηδὲ προφάσεις λέγων μηδὲ παραγωγάς τινας εὐπρεπεῖς ἐπὶ πράγμασι φαύλοις μηχανώμενος πιθανὸς ἔστω καὶ πανοῦργος, ἀλλ´ ἐκεῖνο μᾶλλον οἰέσθω, μίμησιν εἶναι τὴν ποίησιν ἠθῶν καὶ βίων, καὶ ἀνθρώπων οὐ τελείων οὐδὲ καθαρῶν οὐδ´ ἀνεπιλήπτων παντάπασιν, ἀλλὰ μεμιγμένων πάθεσι καὶ δόξαις ψευδέσι καὶ ἀγνοίαις, διὰ δ´ εὐφυΐαν αὑτοὺς πολλάκις μετατιθέντων πρὸς τὸ κρεῖττον, 26a.

The duty of the student in such a case is to state their opposition to what they read and without any hesitation, even if it is in sharp contrast to the messages that each author wants to convey (δεῖ δὲ μὴ δειλῶς μηδ´ ὥσπερ ὑπὸ δεισιδαιμονίας ἐν ἱερῷ φρίττειν ἅπαντα καὶ προσκυνεῖν, ἀλλὰ θαρραλέως ἐθιζόμενον ἐπιφωνεῖν μηδὲν ἧττον τοῦ «ὀρθῶς» καὶ «πρεπόντως» τὸ «οὐκ ὀρθῶς» καὶ «οὐ προσηκόντως», 26b). Freedom of expression is one of humankind’s greatest moral conquests, but at the same time, it is a right guaranteed and established throughout the course of the ages. In the modern school, the teacher, in addition to the role of the transmitter of knowledge, also plays the role of the liberator, since in every teaching intervention they try to emancipate the minds of students from any kind of limitation, giving them the opportunity to express themselves freely and even to disagree, if needed, for the benefit of the educational process (Chatzigeorgiou, 2004). Plutarch, with his advice, urges students to take initiative and stand up against everything that deviates from their beliefs and from what they consider to be right. Given this deeply rooted opinion, he could easily be described as a truly liberal educator.

He also attaches great importance to the interpretation of the content of the poems in relation to the language used by the poets. Many times, the transition from reading to rendering the meaning of a text is not an easy task, as the reader’s inadequacy to properly explain a word or phrase, as well as their belief that there is a possibility of some hidden meaning lurking in the text, can lead them to fail in the interpretive process (Scholes, 2005). The philosopher, for their part, being aware of this situation, advises young people, when the opinions of poets are not easily understood, to initially try to clarify and interpret them, keeping in mind the overall, broader perspective of the work as well as the general themes of the moral principles (ὅπου δ´ ἀσαφῆ τὰ τῆς γνώμης, διοριστέον οὕτω πως ἐφιστάντας τὸν νέον, 27a). But then they emphasise that what they really need to do is to study the vocabulary they come across in the text more carefully and clearly explicate the meaning of the words the writer uses to convey their ideas. The point is that we should not be influenced by contexts and related phrases, since it is very easy to be misled and understand the wrong meanings:

εῖδὲ μη δὲ τὰς ἐκ τῶν παρακειμένων ἢ συμφραζομένων παραλιπεῖν ἀφορμὰς πρὸς τὴν ἐπανόρθωσιν, ἀλλ´ ὥσπερ οἱ ἰατροὶ τῆς κανθαρίδος οὔσης θανασίμου τοὺς πόδας ὅμως καὶ τὰ πτερὰ βοηθεῖν οἴονται καὶ ἀναλύειν τὴν δύναμιν, οὕτως ἐν τοῖς ποιήμασι, κἂν ὄνομα κἂν ῥῆμα παρακείμενον ἀμβλυτέραν ποιῇτὴν πρὸς τὸ χεῖρον ἀπαγωγήν, ἐπιλαμβάνεσθαι καὶ προσδιασαφεῖν, ὡς ἐπὶ τούτων ἔνιοι ποιοῦσι Τοῦτόν ύ που γέρας ἐστὶν ὀι ζυροῖσι βροτοῖσι, κείρασθαί τεκόμην βαλέειν τ´ ἀπὸ δάκρυ παρειῶν καὶ Ὣς γὰρ ἐπεκλώσαν το θεοὶ δειλοῖσι βροτοῖσι ζώειν ἀχνυμένοις. Οὐ γὰρ ἁπλῶς εἶπε καὶ πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις ὑπὸ θεῶν ἐπικεκλῶσθαι λυπηρὸν βίον, ἀλλὰ τοῖς ἄφροσι καὶ ἀνοήτοις, οὓς δειλαίους καὶ οἰκτροὺς διὰ μοχθηρίαν ὄντας εἴωθε «δειλοὺς» καὶ «ὀιζυροὺς» προσαγορεύειν, 22b–c.

In this direction it will be useful, he tells us, to discover the relation that exists between the use of words and the things to which they refer (χάριεν δὲ καὶ τὸ τὴν χρείαν ἄλλοτε πρὸς ἄλλην δύναμιν λαμβάνοντες, 22f), to know their usual use (ἄλλος τοίνυν τρόπος ἐστὶ τὰς ἐν τοῖς ποιήμασιν ὑποψίας πρὸς τὸ βέλτιον ἐκ τοῦ χείρονος μεθιστὰς ὁ διὰ τῶν ὀνομάτων τῆς συνηθείας, περὶ ὃν δεῖ τὸν νέον γεγυμνάσθαι μᾶλλον ἢ περὶ τὰς λεγομένας γλώττας, 22c) and their synonyms (ἀλλ´ ἀντὶδόξης ἢ δυνάμεως ἢ εὐτυχίας ἤ τινος ὁμοίου τῇ ἀρετῇ κεχρῆσθαι τὸν ποιητὴν ἡγείσθω, 24e–f), as well as their figurative meaning (πολλῶν οὖν οὕτω λεγομένων εἰδέναι δεῖ καὶ μνημονεύειν ὅτι καὶ τῷ τοῦ Διὸς καὶ Ζηνὸς ὀνόματι ποτὲ μὲν τὸν θεὸν ποτὲ δὲ τὴν τύχην πολλάκις δὲ τὴν εἱμαρμένην προσαγορεύουσιν, 23c–d). In this way, Plutarch enables the listener of poetry not only to interpret the poets’ verses in their own unique, singular way, but also to experience at the same time a deep, inner gratification that stems from their personal engagement with the text (Konstan, 2004).

However, the instructions for a better reading do not stop here. The following chapters discuss how young people should enter the adventurous world of poetry. Plutarch tells us that young people’s contact with texts should be spontaneous and smooth, so that they can have as good and successful a reading experience as possible:

πρῶτον μὲν οὖν εἰσάγειν εἰς τὰ ποιήματα δεῖ τὸν νέον μηδὲν οὕτω μεμελετημένον ἔχοντα καὶ πρόχειρον ὡ ςτὸ “πολλὰ ψεύδονται ἀοιδοὶ, 16a, οὕτως οὖν τούτων ἐχόντων ἐπάγωμεν τοῖς ποιήμασι τὸν νέον μὴ τοιαύτας ἔχοντα δόξας περὶτῶν καλῶν ἐκείνων καὶ μεγάλων ὀνομάτων, ὡς ἄρα σοφοὶ καὶ δίκαιοι οἱ ἄνδρες ἦσαν, ἄκροι τε βασιλεῖς καὶ κανόνες ἀρετῆς ἁπάσης καὶ ὀρθότητος, 25d.

And indeed, on the one hand he seems to be right, as the lack of either a negative or a positive bias and preconceived notions enables the student to disengage and disentangle themselves from the stereotypes and preconceptions that prevent them from fully engaging with the work they are reading. On the other hand, of course, when the text has difficult vocabulary and deep meanings, it is immediately understood that the most important element for reading comprehension is the pre-existing knowledge that the student will have acquired both at the level of concepts and at the level of factual information (Siegler, 2006). But even beyond that, the young child, when reading a text, can in no way be considered as an unwritten, blank table, or tabula rasa, in other words, since it is certain that they transfer to the act of reading their individual beliefs, their own temperament, and their own cultural and social background (Benton, 2009).

Next, Chaironeas refers to the teacher and the methods they can follow to more easily overcome the murky, obscure areas of literary production. The teacher’s role, according to his words, is to lead the reading audience to the most beautiful and remarkable points of the poems they teach to ensure the unity of the work’s premise and to more easily fulfil its didactic–moral goals. However, in the event that ambiguities, disagreements, or deviations from the original aims are encountered, they can put them aside by disregarding them and focus only on those passages that they consider suitable for the students:

τὰ γὰρτ οιαῦτα τὰς λύσεις ἔχει προδήλους, ἄν, ὥσπερ εἴρηται, πρὸς τὰ βελτίονα τῇ κρίσει τοὺς νέους κατευθύνωμεν. Ὅσα δ´ εἴρηται μὲν ἀτόπως εὐθὺς δ´ οὐ λέλυται, ταῦτα δεῖ τοῖς ἀλλαχόθι πρὸς τοὐναντίον εἰρημένοις ὑπ´ αὐτῶν ἀνταναιρεῖν, μὴ ἀχθομένους τῷ ποιητῇ μηδὲ χαλεπαίνοντας ἀλλ´ ἐν ἤθει καὶ μετὰ παιδιᾶς λεγομένοις, 20 d–e.

In addition, the teacher can also search in other similar works or other genres, such as those of philosophers, to correct (Westway, 1922), analyse, or expand the meanings of the authors that do not work for the benefit of the students (ἂν δ’αὐτοὶ μὴ διδῶσι τῶν ἀτόπως εἰρημένων λύσεις, οὐ χεῖρόν ἐστιν ἑτέρων ἐνδόξων ἀποφάσεις ἀντιτάττοντας ὥσπερ ἐπὶ ζυγοῦ ῥέπειν πρὸς τὸ βέλτιον, 21 d, 36 d). In both cases, however, they must be careful and direct the students to examine the general framework of a subject and not individual, separate parts of a work (Pervo, 2016).

Conclusions

In ‘How to study poetry’, listening to poetry is presented as a difficult and demanding task on the part of the student, who is called upon to distinguish its positive from its negative elements by adopting a critical attitude towards it. According to the author, the main characteristic of artistic discourse is its imitative function and the ability to present and explain reality in its own unique way. He himself treats poems as sources of role standards that educate and shape the character of young children, hence the special interest he shows in the way of teaching and receiving language in verse. During the lesson, the young person identifies with the heroes they read and feels the need to invest emotionally in one of them, whilst at the same time adopting new behaviours to change for the better. Thus, apart from its aesthetic value, poetry is educational, which is why it is important for the young student to come into contact with it with an experienced teacher by their side, so that they concentrate on the text and always choose the appropriate characters to imitate. For Plutarch, the teacher should never be absent from the reading of literary texts; his sole concern is to mediate between the student and the poem, opening paths forward to the deeper, profound meanings and ideas well hidden within. Through a series of reflections and reasoning, he forms the opinion that there are three major categories of readers which have been formed on the basis of what is sought each time in the study of a text. To the first category belongs the philo-mythical reader who applies special weight to the plot and the structure of the story of the work, to the second the philologist – the classical scholar, that is – who focusses more on its language and style, and to the third the moral–philosophical reader, who seeks in poetry more educational guidance rather than entertainment. Although these three types are created on a purely theoretical level, they aptly represent the reading strategies that the writer has in mind and show us, in an illustrative and clarifying way, that true reading requires all three reading skills.