ANNE-MARIE BOWERYIn each of these dialogues narrated by Socrates, an interlocutor
blushes.^43 These blushes are physical indications of various emotional
responses ranging from modesty to embarrassment to erotic affection.
For example, Socrates tells his friend that “Charmides blushed and the
blush heightened his beauty, for modesty is becoming in youth” (Char-
mides 158d), and the narrative audience learns that Hippothales blushes
when Socrates calls attention to his erotic interest in Lysis (Lysis 204b
and 204c). Characters also blush when they must admit some morally
ambiguous aspect of their desires. For example, Hippocrates blushes
when he admits Protagoras is a sophist (Protagoras 312a). An interlocu-
tor’s blush might also indicate that some hidden personal allegiance has
been brought to light, as Charmides’ smile indicates at Charmides, 161c.
On other occasions, a character’s blush signifi es his shame or frus-
tration over his inability to answer the question put before him. For
example, in the Euthydemus, Socrates tells us, “the boy [Clinias] blushed
and looked at me in doubt” (275d). Similarly, in the Republic, Socrates
“saw what I had not yet seen before—Thrasymachus blushing” (350d).
This shaming of Thrasymachus parallels the interaction between Pro-
tagoras and Alcibiades in the Protagoras: “It looked to me that Protago-
ras was embarrassed by Alcibiades’ words, not to mention the insistence
of Callias and practically the whole company. In the end, he reluctantly
brought himself to resume our dialogue and indicated he was ready to
be asked questions” (348b). In these instances, the interlocutors’ blush-
ing embarrassment indicates their admission of aporia, the point of
philosophical perplexity, where the characters admit the inadequacy of
their previous assumptions. Socratic cross-examination depends upon
the admission of aporia. When an interlocutor recognizes the concep-
tual limitation of an intellectual position, the argument transcends the
impasse of thought. Socrates’ narrative uses an emotional response, the
blush, to signal this philosophical turning point, where the possibility of
continued conversation emerges.^44
Laughter also appears in each of these dialogues. Laughter can
indicate a range of emotional responses. Laughter can reveal personal
allegiance between interlocutors: “Whereupon he [Charmides] laughed
slyly, and looked at Cr it ia s” (Charmides 162b). It can indicate personal de-
sire: “He [Hippocrates] laughed and said, ‘You bet he has, Socrates. He
has a monopoly on wisdom and won’t give me any’ ” (Protagoras 310d).
It can reveal a character’s attitude toward Socrates: “He [Thrasyma-
chus] listened, burst out laughing very scornfully, and said, ‘Heracles!
Here is that habitual irony of Socrates’” (Republic 337a). Laughter can
also indicate a character’s aporia. For example, “Glaucon laughed and
said... ‘for I don’t have a good enough idea at the moment of what we’re
to say’ ” (Republic 398c).