One of the books in the Undistraction category (recommended of course in Damon Young’s Distraction: A Philosopher’s Guide to Being Free), Paul Veyne’s 1993 (but published in translation from the French in 2003) Seneca: The Life of a Stoic proved to be a disappointment, but by no means the fault of the book itself. What I guess I was looking for was something similar to what I’m getting from Hilary Spurling’s wonderful two-part biography of Matisse: an illuminating understanding of a person’s life, alongside a cogent understanding of what that person’s thoughts/creations means for the world and in particular for me. All that Veyne’s work has done is bewilder me even more.
Seneca: The Life of a Stoic is lucidly written and logically organized, but the middle heart of it is a detailed, and to me most baffling, long chapter on Stoicism and Seneca’s contribution to that school of philosophy. Some aspects of Stoicism became clearer; for example, how Seneca could be a philosopher developing an unencumbered-life philosophy at the same time as advising despot Nero and staying rich, and the political milieu that can be so misleading compared to the norms we now possess. But much of the discussion was way too academic for this steaming brain. And the biographical portions of the book – the short first and third chapters – suffered from being short and, again, too academic. For a serious student of philosophy, I can recommend Seneca, but alas, it was not for me.
I must admit to disappointment with myself – both Seneca’s own Letters from a Stoic and this Seneca biography have failed to significantly educate me, although something in me remains fascinated by the topic. I think I’ll return to Damon’s book before deciding what to do next.
2 Comments
It’s a fine introduction to Seneca’s life and times, but it’s nothing like Spurling’s masterful achievement – you’re right.
I’m surprised you didn’t like the letters, though. I found them a very intimate, clear-minded philosophy. High-minded, but practical.
It wasn’t that I didn’t like the Letters; they were, as you so aptly put it, epistles of ‘intimate, clear-minded philosophy.’ I enjoyed reading them but bailed out about a third of the way through, having a reaction akin to a son rebelling against the constant advice of a father (or mother!). What I hoped Veyne would do is establish a conceptual framework to help me analyze what each letter might mean for me. I think what I will do is try the Letters, much slower this time. There is definitely something about Stoicism that appeals to my personal brand of existentialism.