Lady Philosophy: A Literary Analysis

Within the first few pages of The Consolation of Philosophy, Boethius laments his circumstances from the confines of a cell. Lady Philosophy arrives to soothe him, but she soon discovers that her former charge suffers from a deep-seated existential crisis that simple sympathy will not cure. In order to fulfill her dual role as teacher and healer, Lady Philosophy incorporates both an extended appeal to Boethius’s poetic sensibilities and a Socratic approach to introspection. The empathetic qualities present in both of these educational methods help her correct the prisoner’s misery because they allow her to gradually overcome Boethius’s initial resistance to advice. Although he ultimately proves to be an eager student, Boethius finds it difficult

to remove his ego from the learning process. At first, he counters Lady Philosophy’s early explorations with emotional retorts and only reluctantly concedes to her assertions. Eventually, however, Boethius learns to appreciate his position from the objective viewpoint that Lady Philosophy urges him to consider, and through their combined intellectual effort, he emerges from his pit of despair.
It goes without saying that the nature and subject of Boethius’s despair at least in part directs Lady Philosophy’s approach to easing him out of his misery. Soon after she offers him her ear, Boethius mourns, “…and among the burdens that weigh on me is this idea that, if actions are judged only by outcomes, then those who are, like me, unfortunate or unlucky are likely to be immediately abandoned by men of goodwill” (Consolation, p. 17). It is apparent here that the prisoner’s unhappiness stems from his self-portrayal as a victim of capricious Fortune. Despite a distinguished career and a virtuous attempt to protect the Senate, Fortune abandoned him to the will of malicious men. Lady Philosophy will have to uproot Boethius’s deep-seated misunderstandings of the human condition in order to assuage him: Firstly, Boethius must learn that Fortune—and by proxy, fate—do not determine life’s outcomes. Secondly, he must re-evaluate his definition of happiness to account for the aforementioned notion that Fortune should not weigh as heavily on his perception of existence. Unfortunately, these beliefs are integral to Boethius’s identity and his awareness of the world, so Lady Philosophy will have to carefully coax him towards accepting a new interpretation of the human condition. If she missteps by simply forcing an entirely separate world view upon him, he will resist the change.
Luckily, Lady Philosophy’s Socratic style of inquiry allows her to induce a modification of Boethius’s mindset cautiously, without triggering any internal opposition. The majority of the conversations that follow Boethius outlining his concerns mirror the following formula: “’Do you suppose, for instance, that that which needs nothing is in need of power?’ ‘No, that can’t be.’ ‘You are correct. If it needs power, it needs the help of other people.’ ‘Yes.’ ‘So power and self-sufficiency turn out to be the same.’ ‘That would follow’” (Consolation, p. 80). In this discourse, Lady Philosophy poses a series of assumptions, each building upon the previous assumption; Boethius evaluates each assumption individually and either agrees or disagrees with the argument made. The teacher chooses to lead the student to conclusions through this method because it encourages the student to seriously consider the individual statements before saying “yes” or “no.” What if the teacher were to simply deliver the lessons to the student as statements that resemble platitudes, without the exchange of arguments and agreements? To simply state “power and self-sufficiency are the same” removes the student’s participation from reaching that iteration in a series of arguments. By using the Socratic method and posing questions for Boethius to answer, Lady Philosophy leads her pupil to achieve revelations through the power of his own reasoning. This approach is empathetic by nature since she does not have to force her perspective onto Boethius; he can personally follow the logic that leads to the arguments she makes and choose to mold his own perspective to resemble her more objective one.
Lady Philosophy’s use of poetry augments the ability of her arguments to reshape Boethius’s awareness of his unhappiness. She initially expresses disgust at the Muses of poetry who comfort the prisoner before she arrives: “’Who let these choir girls in here to approach a sick man’s bedside? They have no cures for what ails him’” (Consolation, p. 4). Lady Philosophy’s demeans the Muses of poetry with the term “choir girls;” the refuge provided for Boethius by their practice pales in comparison to the salvation which Boethius can acquire through Philosophy’s guided introspection. Yet it does not explain why she resorts to song to supplement her arguments throughout the remainder of Consolation. To begin, one must take note of the way Boethius introduces himself when he says in the first lines of the book, “I used to write cheerful poems, happy and life-affirming, but my eyes are wet with tears and the poems are those that only grieving Muses would prompt me to compose” (Consolation, p. 1). Boethius pays homage to the tradition of invoking the Muses that one may observe in the work of great historical poets like Homer. This, of course, strongly implies that he considers himself a poet; Lady Philosophy must realize this, so she incorporates verse as summaries or allegories for her argument. There can be no question as to the effectiveness of her choice to include poetry, however. After she sings about the importance of love and friendship to the world, Boethius reflects, “She finished singing, and the melody hung in the air, its sweetness still in my ears, which were eager for more” (Consolation, p. 59). This shows that Lady Philosophy’s logical argument can appeal to the prisoner’s intellectual understanding of his unhappiness, but it fails to attract his emotional involvement in the argument. The use of poetry, thus, provides a complete learning experience for Boethius: by engaging the portions of his self which logic simply cannot touch, he becomes more open to the ideals which Lady Philosophy coaxes him to adopt.
Naturally, the success of Lady Philosophy’s lessons depends heavily on the receptiveness of Boethius as a student.

Initially, the prisoner finds it difficult to separate the painful events of the recent past from the direction of the present discussion: “’But it is also true that the worst kind of misfortune is one that befalls someone who has previously known happiness’” (Consolation, p. 37). Boethius cannot at first break away from the idea that Fortune has such an enormous impact on his life because he has just undergone one of the worst experiences of his life. Although Lady Philosophy urges him to relinquish his passion for the contrived “good” of man in favor of a larger, more wholesome good, the student defaults to the more immediate bitterness of his situation. Eventually, however, Lady Philosophy’s calm appeals to logic soothe Boethius’s emotional resistance. As the teacher progresses with her Socratic questioning, his resistance eventually slips: “’I can’t remember a time when I wasn’t worried, no…’ ‘So you desired the presence of some things and the absence of others?’ ‘That’s right.’ ‘Now everyone lacks something he desires, isn’t that right?’ ‘Of course,’ I had to agree” (Consolation, p. 66). One might perceive a hint of resignation throughout this excerpt, especially within Boethius’s final thought. He slowly realizes that he cannot find a flaw in Lady Philosophy’s logic even though he still feels emotionally primed to reject her attempts to get him to see reason. Nonetheless, Boethius reaches a point where his emotional attachment to the past no longer hinders his ability to internalize Lady Philosophy’s lessons: “’…It occurs to me to ask you whether you find any room at all in your theories for the operation of pure chance. Is there such a thing? And if so, what is it?’” (Consolation, p. 146). The prisoner’s progress is apparent here, involving a movement from his initial struggle to accept the Lady’s advice to an earnest appreciation of the

knowledge she imparts; Boethius has gained the confidence not only to answer her questions but also to voice his own curiosity regarding the subject of their conversations, the mark of a truly dedicated student.
Some might argue that Lady Philosophy’s Socratic method of teaching results in only limited success with regards to Boethius becoming a true student. It is possible that her process of posing assumptions and accepting binary answers directs Boethius towards a specific conclusion or mindset, governed by the set of logical precursors she coerces him to draw; this argument draws upon the assumption that learning requires a student have the ability to freely choose what he wants to study. While this may be true, it overlooks what Lady Philosophy actually achieves through her seemingly unidirectional questioning of Boethius: she empowers him to gradually discard his old passions and emotional attachments to the earthly objects which cause his unhappiness. Boethius may indeed only gain a certain limited perspective by learning from Lady Philosophy, but at the same time, he acquires a freedom to learn by shedding the mental preconceptions which would restrict any future learning.