Something that only just struck me about the work of A.C. Grayling is that the man is a professional academic. He must, in his time, have marked literally hundreds of assignments and essays submitted by his students, and his own student days, he must have written his own share of such.
I cannot help thinking that any student of his who wrote so tediously and so pedantically, yet so digressively, would surely have been awarded a failing grade by Grayling. Unfortunately, Grayling has reached a point in his professional career where he is beyond the dictates of superior academics, or even apparently, editors. It’s a shame.
Grayling’s philhellenia continues unabated in his recounting of the life of Solon. And while the facts of Solon’s life are all very well and good, it is rare for Grayling to actually come to a point, to say this thing is worthy and that thing is not. Perhaps he was seeking to resemble the infamoous multiplicity of interpretations of the Bible in his own book by being similarly opaque and open to interpretation. A point on which I differ with him greatly: if I was seeking to rewrite the Bible for a modern era, I would seek to improve upon it, not to faithfully copy its flaws.