2. Another way of stating the perhaps the same question is to remember that Lucian began his career as a rhetorician, became an entertainer, and ultimate practiced a kind of moral or philosophical criticism. What is the impact of each of these professions on his writing, and what is their relationship to each other? (He discusses his relationship to rhetoric and philosophy in his dialogue "The Double Indictment" ["Bis Accusatus"].)
3. What really irritates the readers who find Lucian offensive (primarily early Christians) is that he treats not only Christianity (in passing) but other religions (directly) as fallacious and deceptive. What are the grounds on which he sees religion as foolish or another of life's human delusions? Is his position on religion consistent? What do you make of the fact that his works are filled with religious and mythological figures?
4. A similar question can be asked about Lucian's attacks on philosophy. Is he against all philosophy or just some (and if he is against all of it, on what grounds can he be so universal)? Is his position consistent? What distinction does he make between philosophy and philosophers? Does he have an identifiable philosophical position of his own? Is his explanation in "The Fisherman" persuasive?
5. The afterlife seems to have a particularly important place in Lucian's satiric universe. What are its actual characteristics? What, according to Lucian, is it like to be dead? What are the reactions of the people who arrive in Hades? What do the dead tell us about being alive? Is being dead funny (or does it show that being alive is funny?) Is Lucian's infernal point-of-view hopelessly negative, or does it have benign implications?
6. The introduction to "A True Story" tells us directly that nothing in it is true (perhaps an example of the "liar paradox"). But it is a parody of history, so is history also untrue? And it contains a number of religious and mythological figures, so are they untrue? If we start with the assumption that everything is untrue, where does doubt end? If everything is untrue, what is the point of saying anything. (Lucian tells us that his purpose intellectual entertainment, but, of course, that also may be untrue.) Do his untruths symbolize deep and important truths.
7. Beyond its parody of histories and epics and travelers' tall tales, "A True Story" provides a richly imagined series of distortions of the physical human body--the kind of grotesque distortion that some find typical of satire. What are the satiric functions of the physically grotesque? What are its functions here?
8. In addition to the literary forms parodied in "A True Story," Lucian parodies tragedy in "Zeus the Opera Star" and philosophical dialogue in a variety of works (especially "The Fisherman"). Are the forms that he parodies the objects of his attack or the vehicles of attack? Do they function differently in different works? (Consider carefully the relation of the nature of the form to the nature of the attack.)
9. In many of his works, Lucian identifies a satiric spokesman (sometimes a fictionalized version of himself, but often others). What is the nature of these satiric speakers? What do they have in common? Why is it useful to Lucian, or to his audience, to have these fictional figures to deliver the satiric message? Are some of these speakers ironic rather than credible?
10. One of the advantages Charon gains when he looks at the world from mountains piled on top of each other is the ability to see the whole world. But another advantage is that he sees historical events of quite different times as if they were happening simultaneously. Lucian's satiric fantasy compresses both space and time. But to what end? What are the satiric advantages attached to this compressed perspective? You might want to consider the question in relation to Lucian's general treatment of perspective and the manipulation of perspective in Menippean satire.
11. Lucian's Timon is the archetypal misanthrope, the ancestor of Shakespeare's Timon, Molière's Alceste and Swift's Gulliver. He raises the question central to the misanthropic situation: is the world as bad as the misanthrope sees it, or does the problem lie with the misanthrope's negative view? Is Timon overgeneralizing on limited experience, or is his experience only too true of the rapaciousness of human nature? Is Timon a sympathetic character? Does he represent a version of the satirist?
12. Peregrinus was a historic individual who committed suicide, more-or-less as Lucian describes it, at the Olympic games in 165 A.D. Is there a positive case to be made for him as a man of courage (however misguided) rather than as a fraud? (He did, after all, really kill himself.) What are the roles Lucian adopts in the story, from the mocker at his death to the anonymous teller of his scandalous life? Is Lucian successful in creating a satiric force strong enough to overcome the undeniable force of the death of Peregrinus?