The Following Abbreviations of Books by Strauss Are Used in the Notes
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Notes The following abbreviations of books by Strauss are used in the Notes: AAPL The Argument and the Action of Plato's Laws (Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press, 1975). CM City and Man (Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press, 1964). HPP History of Political Philosophy, ed. Leo Strauss and Joseph Cropsey, 1st edn (Chicago, Ill.: Rand McNally, 1963); 2nd edn (Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press, 1973). LAM Liberalism Ancient and Modern (New York: Basic Books, 1968). NRH Natural Right and History (Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press, 1953). OT On Tyranny, first published 1963, later revised and enlarged (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1968). PAW Persecution and the Art ofWriting (Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1952). PPH The Political Philosophy of Hobbes (Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press, 1952; first published by The Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1936). SA Socrates and Aristophanes (Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press, 1966). SCR Spinoza's Critique of Religion, trans. from the German by E. M. Sinclair (New York: Schocken, 1965; first published by Akademie-Verlag, Berlin, 1930). SPPP Studies in Platonic Political Philosophy, ed. with an Introduction by T. L. Pangle (Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press, 1983). TM Thoughts on Machiavelli (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1958). WIPP What is Political Philosophy? (New York: Free Press, 1959; repr. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1973). XS Xenophon's Socrates (London: Cornell University Press, 1972). XSD Xenophon's Socratic Discourse (London: Cornell University Press, 1970). Notes to Chapter 1: Leo Strauss: Teacher and Philosopher 1. Lewis A. Coser, Refugee Schofars in America: Their Impact and Their Experiences (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1984). Coser refers to Strauss as the only refugee scholar who managed to attract a 'brilliant galaxy of disciples who created an academic cult around his teaching' (p. 4). 2. The most recent and most complete bibliography of Strauss' s work can be found in SPPP. Other compilations of Strauss's work can be found in Joseph Cropsey, 'Leo Strauss: A Bibliography and Memorial, 203 204 Notes 1899-1973', Interpretation, vol. 5, no. 2 (1975) pp. 133-47; Joseph Cropsey (ed.), Ancients and Moderns: Essays on the Tradition of Political Philosophy in Honor of Leo Strauss (New York: Basic Bookst 1964); David L. Schaefer, Jr, 'The Legacy of Leo Strauss: A Bibliographie Introduction', Intercollegiate Review, voL 9, no. 3 (Summer 1974) pp. 139-48. The latter is an excellent and informative introduction to Strauss' s work. 3. For some devastating reviews of Strauss's books see Terence Irwin's review of XS in Philosophical Review, vol. 83 (1974) pp. 409-13. One of Strauss' s claims to farne is having resurrected Xenophon by emphasizing his importance for understanding Socrates. Irwin comments that Strauss succeeds only in reminding us of 'how unexciting Xenophon can be'. Worse than that, Strauss's interpretation is a 'tedious paraphrase' that 'reduces the amusing episodes to a uniform level of dullness' (p. 409). See also Trevor J. Saunders's review of Strauss's AAPL, in Political Theory, vol. 4 (1976) pp. 239-42. Strauss is described as sailing 'serenely across the surface of the text, skirting obvious rocks and crashing on submerged ones without knowing he is doing so' (p. 242); see also J. W. Yolton, 'Locke on the Law of Nature', Philosophical Review, vol. 67 (1958) pp. 477-98. Yolton points to innumerable examples of careless scholarship and a tendency to quote out of context; see also Victor Gourevitch, 'Philosophy and Politics 1I', Review of Metaphysics, voL 22, no. 2 (December 1968) pp. 281-328, which is the second part of a two-part study of Strauss's work: the list of errors occurs on pp. 326-8; see also the criticisms of M. F. Bumyeat, 'Sphinx Without a Secret', a recent review of Strauss's SPPP, in New York Review of Books, vol. 32, no. 9 (30 May 1985) pp. 30-6, a penetrating and comprehensive critique of Straussian scholarship and philosophy. 4. Upon his death the National Review reported in its editorial comment that Leo Strauss had deeply impressed several generations of political philosophers, many of whom 'occupy high posts in major universities a11 across the nation' (vol. 25, (9 November 1973) p. 1226). Since his death in 1973, Strauss's popularity has been gaining momentum, and is now as visible in Canada as in the United States. 5. Werner J. Dannhauser, 'Leo Strauss: Becoming NaIve Again' , American Scholar, voL 44 (1974-5) pp. 636-42, esp. p. 637. 6. Jacob Klein and Leo Strauss, 'A Giving of Accounts', in The College, vol. 22 (April 1970) pp. 1-5. The College is a publication of St John's College, Annapolis, Maryland, where Strauss was the Scott Buchanan Distinguished Scholar-in-Residence at the time of his death. In this autobiographical piece, Strauss describes Marburg as a neo-Kantian center founded by Herman Cohen. He teIls us that the school was 'in astate of disintegration' due to the increasing power of Husserl's phenomenological approach. 7. Strauss was raised as an Orthodox Jew and had a gymnasium education. He says that he was converted to Zionism ('simple, straightforward political Zionism') at the age of 17. From his studies at the Academy of Jewish Research came his first book, translated Notes 205 from the German edition of 1930 into English as Spinoza' s Critique 01 Religion. 8. There he wrote On Tyranny (1948), enlarged and revised with an essay by Alexandre Kojeve in 1963, one of three books Strauss was to write on Xenophon. The others were Xenophon's Socrates (1972), an interpretation of Xenophon' s Memorabilia, and Xenophon' s Socratic Discourse (1970), an interpretation of Xenophon's Oeconomicus. 9. When he arrived from California to Annapolis in 1969 a 'spontaneous champagne party greeted hirn, his wife and adopted daughter and son-in-Iaw at the railroad station between trains'. This is reported by George Anastaplo, 'On Leo Strauss: A Yahrzeit Remembrance', University 01 Chicago Magazine, vol. 67 (Winter 1974) p. 35. 10. See, for example, 'The Achievement of Leo Strauss,' National Review, vol. 25 (7 December 1973) pp. 1347-57, contributions by Walter Berns, Herbert J. Storing, Harry V. Jaffa and Werner J. Dannhauser; Allan Bloom, 'Leo Strauss: September 20, 1899-0ctober 18, 1973', Political Theory, vol. 2, no. 4 (November 1974) pp. 372-92, is an excellent intellectual biography; Schaefer, 'The Legacy of Leo Strauss', is a concise introduction to his most famous works and their themes; Cropsey, 'Leo Strauss: A Bibliography and Memorial', is still among the most complete bibliographies available: Cropsey was a colleague of Strauss, and is his literary executor; Anastaplo, 'A Yahrzeit Remembrance', pp. 31-8, provides interesting descriptions of Strauss as a man; Dannhauser, 'Becoming NaIve Again', provides a detailed description of what it was like to be a graduate student at Chicago and to attend Leo Strauss' s seminar in political philosophy; see also Jacob Klein, J. Winfree Smith, Ted A. Blanton and Laurence Berns in 'Memorials to Leo Strauss', St. lohn's Review (formerly The College), vol. 25, no. 4 Q"anuary 1974) pp. 1-5: Blanton teIls us that he was 'charmed' by Strauss, and that in time he hoped to train his eyes to see in the texts what Strauss saw; Laurence Berns, 'Leo Strauss 1899- 1973', Independent Journal 01 Philosophy, vol. 2 (1978) pp. 1-3; a very interesting and more detached article is Milton Himmelfarb' s 'On Leo Strauss', Commentary, vol. 58, no. 2 (May 1974) pp. 60-6. 11. Jaffa, 'The Achievement of Leo Strauss', p. 1353. See also Andre Liebich, 'Straussianism and Ideology', in Anthony Parel (ed.), Ideology, Philosophy and Politics (Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1983), an outstanding work that attempts to come to grips with Strauss' s conservatism. Liebich is puzzled by the comparison of Strauss with Machiavelli. For reasons that will become apparent below, this comparison is by no means unwarranted; on the contrary, it is quite appropriate (see Chapter 6). 12. Jaffa, 'The Achievement of Leo Strauss', p. 1355. 13. Anastaplo, 'A Yahrzeit Remembrance', p. 30. 14. Berns, 'The Achievement of Leo Strauss', p. 1347. 15. Storing, 'The Achievement of Leo Strauss', p. 1348. 16. Anastaplo, 'A Yahrzeit Remembrance, p. 36. 17. Ibid., p. 33. 18. Dannhauser, 'Becoming NaIve Again', p. 637. 206 Notes 19. Ibid. 20. Ibid., p. 639. 21. Ibid., p. 638. The Straussians are characterized by an overwhelming self-confidence that often bespeaks an embarrassing lack of modesty. In 'The Achievement of Leo Strauss' p. 1348, Storing explains this phenomenon as follows: 'If Strauss' s students have sometimes displayed an unseemly self-assurance, the source is not so much pride of truth as relief that they have not allowed political science to make them more stupid than they need to be.' 22. Dannhauser, 'Becoming NaIve Again' p. 641. Dannhauser contrasts Strauss' s formality and aloofness with his own style and that of many other Straussian teachers who believe in 'entering the lifet of their students. However, Anastaplo reports that Strauss was not always so aloof. He established 'intimate tiest with his students earlier in his career but confessed to Anastaplo that a man of 50 could establish relations with 25-year-old graduate students that a man of 65 simply could not. See Anastaplo, 'A Yahrzeit Remembrance', p.33. 23. Dannhauser, 'Becoming NaIve Again', p. 639, certainly feIt a great deal oi satisfaction from belonging to a group and went so far as to say that Strauss was responsible for much of the happiness in his life (p. 640). 24. Leo Strauss, I An Unspoken Prologue to a Public Lecture at St. John's [In Honor of Jacob Klein, 1899-1978]', Interpretation, vol.