You may be my only reader, Hannah! I've created a long list of overlapping features of the Socratic dialogue and Roman satire:

*the “serious play” of Socrates and satire

*the “in-between-ness” in a broad sense of Socrates and satire, including “serious play,” tragedy and comedy, beautiful and ugly, superior and abject, inclusive and exclusive

*alternately, the generic and literary “unboundedness” of Platonic dialogue and satire, both of which incorporate and alter other genres and styles, including tragedy and comedy

*the inconclusive, open-ended nature of “early” Platonic dialogue and satire

*the atemporal or retrospective setting of the Socratic dialogue and Roman satire, particularly Juvenal

*the inefficacy of Socrates and satire

*the lack of any prescriptive moral program from Socrates and satire

*tension between abjection and superiority of Socrates / the satirist

*plain language, non-“poetic” or rhetorical, exempla from “everyday life”

*the ambiguous use of characterization and personae

*tension between the public person and the private person, the inner person and outer person, between public morality and private goodness...and the list goes on.

But I am completely lost when it comes to the way to organize this study. By Roman author? By overlapping feature? No idea.

And Roman satire does not quote or allude to Socrates very much, so it's not a matter of comparing one passage to another, but of arguing how literature "works" or what the "effect" of a passage or poem is.

I promise, if I could see how to structure this, it would have been done years ago!

Thanks so much for your kind words. And thank you for reading and responding. I appreciate you.