Love can be defined in a number of ways and has been regularly been done so throughout history. In Plato’s Symposium and Ovid’s The Art of Love, two authors analyze love and consider the ways in which individuals, at the time, perceived love. Diotima’s concept of love, in comparison to that of Ovid’s is not only stylistically but also fundamentally disparate.
In Socrates speech of Plato’s Symposium, he discusses Diotima’s concept of love and while most who attended the symposium think as he does, it is through hearing her teachings and understanding her concept that he is elevated to a higher thinking of love. Diotima does this in a way that makes Socrates question his thoughts and ideas of love, but allows him to reach new conclusions on why his former ideas are not entirely accurate. Diotima arrives at her definition of love in a manner that requires Socrates to redefine love and understand why her concept is credible. Diotima’s ultimate goal of explaining her concept of love is achieved in a way that seems as though Socrates is recognizing this by himself.
Expanding her definition, Diotima explains Love’s parents and why they are relevant to not only the making of Love, but also why it is the way it is. This is critical, as Diotima is directly challenging how other people thought of love at the time. Illustrated when she states, “… he’s always poor; far from being sensitive and beautiful…” but on the contrary states that Love, as the son Resource, is “… always weaving tricks; he desires knowledge and is resourceful in getting it;” (P. 40)
Diotima’s concept of love is most notable for the fact that in it there are three types of love. While the qualities of love remain relevant, it is through these types that a human being can fully achieve love at its highest form. The three types of love discussed serve as a stepping-stone for the next, more powerful and divine, type of love. While they are relatively understandable, these types of love are incredibly essential to Diotima’s speech in that they remain a lasting and final thought for those at the symposium. Of the three, the most significant love is that of knowledge because its supposed impact on the individual is that “he’ll give birth, through a boundless love of knowledge, to many beautiful and magnificent discourses and ideas.” (48)
While Diotima’s concept of love examines various forms of beauty and how they are much more than most people believe, Ovid’s definition of love seems to be different in that it applies a patronizing tone to a topic that appears to not be very serious to him as one would suspect of an author of books titled of The Art of Love.
The manner in which Ovid arrives at his definition of love is more blunt and ongoing while being suggested in the overall style, narrative and tone of the text. Ovid’s definition of love comes in a continuing series of analogies and mythological references in which “The Art of Love” is not nearly as beautiful or revolutionary as art actually is. Throughout the text, the speaker implies that it is more of a manual of some sort with various myths briefly referenced that act to support the specific stance on women and how to “attract” them.
One way in which Ovid defines love, that is drastically different to that of Diotima’s definition, is that it is somewhat of a hunt for women. In one of the numerous examples, Ovid specifically addresses the, presumably male, reader as “hunters in which coverts to find And how to spread nets for the bird you have in mind,” (P.21) and reduces women to some kind of animal men are in hopes of catching. This reference plays a key role throughout the text in that he continuously compares women to an object or being that is waiting to be caught and implies this can be done so if “The Art of Love” is followed correctly.
Ovid’s definition of love is similar to that of Diotima’s also in that it is not specific to one person, but open to possibilities as it is a mere game. An example of many written in the text that support this is demonstrated when Ovid states, “ My moral rule, though, doesn’t condemn You (heaven forbid!) to one woman all your life-That’s beyond the hope even of a young wife. Play around, but discreetly, decently hiding.” (P. 83) Ovid’s definition of love seems less devoted and rather misogynistic. Although the third book is dedicated to women, Ovid’s definition of love maintains the same predatory tone and treatment of women all through the text.
The ultimate goals of Diotima’s concept of love and Ovid’s concept of love vary greatly and can even be seen as opposites. After comparing the texts, it is apparent that both Diotima and Ovid would not agree on the definition of love.