How to Tell a Flatterer from a Friend (6-7)

Let us, then, consider this matter from the beginning. We have previously said that with most people the beginning of friendship is their congenial disposition and nature, which welcomes the same habits and traits, as nearly as may be, and takes delight in the same pursuits, activities, and avocations; on the subject of this it has also been said:

An old man hath the sweetest tongue for old, And child for child, and woman suits her kind, A sick man suits the sick; misfortune’s thrall Hath charms for him who hath just met mischance.[*]

So then the flatterer, knowing that when people take delight in the same things it is only natural that they find enjoyment and satisfaction in each other’s company, adopts this course in making his first attempts to approach each victim and to secure a lodgement near him; he acts as though the man were some animal running at large in a pasture, [*] and by affecting the same pursuits, the same avocations, interests and manner of life, he gradually gets close to him, and rubs up against him so as to take on his colouring, until his victim gives him some hold and becomes docile and accustomed to his touch: he is ever disapproving actions and lives and persons which he perceives his victim to dislike, while if anything pleases the other he commends, not with moderation, but so as plainly to outdo him in amazement and wonder, and at the same time he stoutly maintains that his affection and hatred are the result of judgement rather than of emotion.

What, then, is the method of exposing him, and by what differences is it possible to detect that he is not really like-minded, or even in a fair way to become like-minded, but is merely imitating such a character? In the first place, it is necessary to observe the uniformity and permanence of his tastes, whether he always takes delight in the same things, and commends always the same things, and whether he directs and ordains his own life according to one pattern, as becomes a free-born man and a lover of congenial friendship and intimacy; for such is the conduct of a friend. But the flatterer, since he has no abiding-place of character to dwell in, and since he leads a life not of his own choosing but another’s, moulding and adapting himself to suit another, is not simple, not one, but variable and many in one, and, like water that is poured into one receptacle after another, he is constantly on the move from place to place, and changes his shape to fit his receiver. The capture of the ape, as it seems, is effected while he is trying to imitate man by moving and dancing as the man does: but the flatterer himself leads on and entices others, not imitating all persons alike, but with one he joins in dancing and singing, and with another in wrestling and getting covered with dust; if he gets hold of a huntsman fond of the chase, he follows on, all but shouting out the words of Phaedra [*]:

Ye gods, but I yearn to encourage the hounds, As I haste on the track of the dapple deer.

He does not trouble himself in regard to the quarry, but he goes about to net and ensnare the huntsman himself. But if he is on the track of a scholarly and studious young man, now again he is absorbed in books, his beard grows down to his feet, the scholar’s gown is the thing now and a stoic indifference, and endless talk about Plato’s numbers and right-angled triangles. At another time, if some easy-tempered man fall in his way, who is a hard drinker and rich,

Then stands forth the wily Odysseus stripped of his tatters;[*]

off goes the scholar’s gown, the beard is mowed down like an unprofitable crop; it’s wine-coolers and glasses now, bursts of laughter while walking in the streets, and frivolous jokes against the devotees of philosophy. Just so at Syracuse, it is said, after Plato had arrived, and an insane ardour for philosophy laid hold on Dionysius, the king’s palace was filled with dust by reason of the multitude of men that were drawing their geometrical diagrams in it: but when Plato fell out of favour, and Dionysius, shaking himself free from philosophy, returned post-haste to wine and women and foolish talk and licentiousness, then grossness and forgetfulness and fatuity seized upon the whole people as though they had undergone a transformation in Circe’s house. A further testimony is to be found in the action of the great flatterers and the demagogues, of whom the greatest was Alcibiades. At Athens he indulged in frivolous jesting, kept a racing-stable, and led a life full of urbanity and agreeable enjoyment; in Lacedaemon he kept his hair cropped close, he wore the coarsest clothing, he bathed in cold water; in Thrace he was a fighter and a hard drinker: but when he came to Tissaphernes, he took to soft living, and luxury, and pretentiousness. So by making himself like to all these people and conforming his way to theirs he tried to conciliate them and win their favour. Not of this type, however, was Epameinondas or Agesilaus, who, although they had to do with a very large number of men and cities and modes of life, yet maintained everywhere their own proper character in dress, conduct, language, and life. So, too, Plato in Syracuse was the same sort of man as in the Academy, and to Dionysius he was the same as to Dion.