Benardete has either absorbed so much of the Platonic rhetorical structure that he has truly seduced Socrattic irony into an intelligible light , or is lost amongst the labyrinthine ways of post straussian scholars. Nobody, undergrad, or grad, knows for sure.
I think the previous reviewer owes me a 'treat'-I have read this a few times, having spent the past few months working on the Sophist, as well as the Theaetetus. I quite agree that it is not the most accessible of Plato's dialogues, but I disagree with the view that it is not worth our trouble. Plato's work on logos in the closing sections of the dialogue, as well as his work on the probems of not-being are amongst the greatest pieces of analysis in the history of philosophy, in my opinion. Perhaps, though, if we are to gain a full appreciation of what Plato is doing here, a look at the problems as raised by Parmenides is necessary first.