This paper is an analysis of the place and function of desire in the Athenian lover/beloved model, as described by speakers in Plato’s Symposium. The analysis focuses on two speakers, Pausanius and Phaedras, and the way they describe Athenian ideals of Love.

Lewis Keyte

Classics 114

Feb. 18^th, 2002

The Function of Desire in Relationships Between Lover and Beloved

The structure and function of different types of sexual relationships were an important part of Athenian culture, and many rules and traditions formed around these relationships based on the mores of society. The male citizens were considered the most important segment of the population, and many Greek writers address the cultural conventions, ideals, and beliefs that formed around these relationships.

The three main types of sexual relationships that involved a male citizen are marriage, the relationship between a young man and an older mentor, and sexual encounters with prostitutes. Plato’s Symposium, a dialog on the nature of love and desire, describes many of the beliefs that Athenians held, especially about the relationship between a man and a youth. The main focus of this paper is the ideal function and place of desire in these male with male relationships, and the benefits this particular bond held for society.

The socially accepted structure of these relationships between an Athenian man and youth was characterized by pursuit and courtship on the part of the man. He was to go after an attractive youth, hoping to make him his beloved [eromenos]. The older man was expected to be the aggressive partner, pursuing the youth out of his erotic desire. In turn, the beloved was expected to be the passive partner, rejecting the man’s advances for a respectable amount of time, and then to enter the relationship to gain the older man as a mentor, not as a sexual partner. This aggressive man and passive youth structure continued into sexual acts, with the older male acting as the dominant, penetrating partner, while the younger man was the passive receptive partner. According to cultural rules, however, it was considered emasculating to be penetrated, so anal intercourse was frowned upon by society. Instead, the man and youth are most often described as engaging in intercural intercourse, in which the aggressive partner placed his phallus between the thighs of the youth.

According Pausanius, one of the speakers in the Symposium, the highest form of love was the kind that formed between two men. While relationships with a woman or a youth could be characterized by the carnal love of common Aphrodite, only the relationships between males- either two men of the same age or between a man and a youth- could contain the intellectual and emotional love of celestial Aphrodite.

Now, the love who accompanies Common Aphrodite is certainly common, and his effects are totally random; this is the Love which ordinary people experience. In the first place, they love women as well as boys; secondly, when they do fall in love they’re attracted to the bodies rather than the minds of the people they love; thirdly, the reason they’re attracted to the most unintelligent people imaginable is that all they’re after is the satisfaction of their desires and they don’t care whether or not their desires are properly satisfied…

On the other hand, the Love which accompanies Celestial Aphrodite is wholly male, with no trace of femininity. (This, then, is the Love which is for boys, and a second point to note is that the provenance of this Love is the goddess who is older and incapable of treating people brutally.) That is why this Love’ inspiration makes people feel affection for what is inherently stronger and more intelligent- which is to say it makes people incline toward the male. (Symposium, 181b-c)

The feelings that Pausanius describe are a notion of love that is much closer to our own than those that were expected to form in other types of male relationships such as marriage. This Celestial love he describes is the basis of the Athenian ideal for the lover and beloved pairings, and this bond is the one in which emotional and intellectual love were prized. A man would marry a woman for her beauty or material gain, but only in a relationship with another man was he expected to gain the more spiritual benefits of love. One must be careful in accepting Pausanius’ argument however, as he describes his own ideals as applying to homoerotic relationships between men of similar ages, and that the love of Celestial Aphrodite is not necessarily present in the relationship between a man and a youth. He begins to explain his distinction later in his speech when he outlines the circumstances in which Celestial Aphrodite is the agent of desire by describing the motives of the lover and beloved. “If these two sets of rules- the one governing affairs with boys, and the one governing education and improvement in general- are combined, then acceptable conditions are created for a boy to gratify his lover.” (Symposium 184c-d)

This statement indicates that despite his own example, the more traditionally portrayed lover to beloved relationship could also manifest these benefits. He continues to expand on this topic revealing his interpretation of the basic motives that each partner must possess in order for the relationship to consist of Celestial love.

…if in any meeting between a lover and his boyfriend each has his set of guidelines- the lover appreciating that any service he performs for a boyfriend who gratifies him would be morally acceptable, and the boy appreciates that any favors he does for a man who is teaching him things and making him good would be morally acceptable… it is only then, when these two facets of the moral code coincide, that it becomes all right for a boy to gratify a lover. Under any other circumstances, it is wrong. (Symposium 184d-e)

After he describes a number of specific cases in which Celestial love is not present, such as a youth choosing a lover out of desire for his wealth or a man choosing a beloved for his ephemeral beauty, he closes his argument with the statement that a relationship based on virtue is that which contains the essence of Celestial love.

So there’s absolutely nothing wrong with gratifying a lover for the sake of virtue. This is the love which belongs with the Celestial goddess. He is Celestial too, and should be highly prized by communities as well as by individuals, since he impels a lover to pay a great deal of serious attention to the question of his own virtue, and does the same for a boy who is the object of a lover’s affection. (Symposium 185b)

These conditions that Pausanius sets out describe the ideal form of a relationship between lover and beloved. While many men would have taken boys as beloveds out of lust for their beauty, the ideal is a relationship in which both seek to gain knowledge and virtue from the other. The benefits of these relationships are further explained by Phaedras, another speaker in the Symposium. His description of the ideal bond between lover and beloved indicates the existence of the Celestial love Pausanius discussed, and how the influence of this love would lead men to be honorable more than any other loyalty to family or city.

…the greatest benefit, to my mind, that a young man can come by in his youth is a virtuous lover, and a virtuous boyfriend is just as good for a lover too. Anyone who wants to live a good life needs to be guided throughout his life by something which love imparts more effectively than family ties can, or public office, or wealth, or anything else. (Symposium 178c)

This something, which Phaedras claims is stronger than the need for any other type of honor, is the desire to avoid any shameful act that would make one lose face in the eyes of one’s lover or beloved.

I mean, it goes without saying that the last person a lover wants to be seen by, in the act of deserting or throwing away his weapons, is his boyfriend; however many times he had to choose, he’d rather die than that… The effect that Love has on lovers is exactly what Homer described, when he talked about a god ‘breathing might’ into some hero or other. (Symposium 179a)

These passages provide strong evidence that the Athenians considered the feelings present in the relationship between lover and beloved to be of great importance to their society. One could argue, however, that the many other relationships citizen males became involved in were just as important, and they had similar duties to be honorable in these regards. While this is true, it is a different sort of honor that these men upheld in relationships such as marriage, family, and city. In marriage, the focus of any situation involving the wife was the preservation of household honor. While adultery was still a betrayal of trust, the wife was seen as mainly a passive agent, and the difficulties arose from the dishonoring of a household by another man and the uncertain parentage of any children the wife might give birth to after this time. In the realm of politics, a failure to serve or to fulfill ones duties was also a stain on the honor of the household and family- it is portrayed as much more public than the ideal private bond between lover and beloved. This manifestation of Celestial love benefited both the lover and beloved, as well as serving society by creating a strong bond that was characterized by its honor and virtue. This bond generated the most powerful form of loyalty a citizen man would experience, and he believes that more than any other loyalty, this love would make men honorable in battle, politics, and business in order to make their beloved proud. In turn, the beloved sought to learn form his mentor in order to become an honorable citizen and individual, eventually passing these values on to his own beloved.