Approaching Leo Strauss : Some Comments on " Thoughts on

The publication of Leo Strauss's Studies in Platonic Philosophy, more than a decade after Strauss's death, is evidence that his work endures, and of something more.' On the first point, it is sufficient to mention that the book was widely noticed, notwithstanding that, save for two short notes on Maimonides, it is an assemblage of previously published pieces. On the second, we may take our bearings from some of the more testy exchanges the book prompted. They demonstrate that Strauss's capacity for inducing confusion, uncertainty, and, ultimately, wonder, has not abated in the years since his death. If a measure of the power of the written word is its tendency to spark disagreement and controversy, then it may be said that Strauss's power as a writer and teacher is greater now than ever. In the past, for example, the battle lines in the arguments over Strauss were fairly simple. They could generally be drawn between Strauss and his adherents and those-typically those he placed among the positivists and historicists-who adamantly opposed his methods and arguments. We now find, however, Strauss's former students, and their students, differing in the most extraordinary terms over the fundamentals of Strauss's teaching and intention. Indeed, among those who openly follow Strauss, the very term "Straussian" has become suspect.'