<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> <META content="MSHTML 5.50.4134.600" name=GENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=#ffffff> <DIV align=left><FONT face="Times New Roman">Dear Listmembers,</FONT></DIV> <DIV align=left><FONT face="Times New Roman">I have a question about lit-crit style approaches to Virgil: I desperately want a response and perspectives from listmembers on both sides of the Atlantic would be particularly appreciated, so come on people now, smile on your brother etc.</FONT></DIV> <DIV align=left><FONT face="Times New Roman">First up:</FONT></DIV> <DIV align=left><FONT face="Times New Roman">I've just read Hinds' monograph "Allusion and Intertext" (I really liked it). Also I've found myself reading a lot of material on Latin Epic from the pages of Ramus and from scholars of what Don Fowler once called the "New Latin" (Arachnion #2: Arachnion. A Journal of Ancient Literature and History on the Web, nr. 2 - <A href="http://www.cisi.unito.it/arachne/num2/fowler.html";>http://www.cisi.unito.it/arachne/num2/fowler.html</A>). I am <U>very</U> late to critical theory and its application to Classical Literature (until very recently, my main area of research was propaganda in the Roman Empire - especially the Flavians and Trajan - as it applied to state control of Art and Architecture). My lateness to these theories and their application was, initially, exactly proportional to my excitement. To really showcase the belated nature of my introduction to this area (fatebor enim), I was turned onto Don Fowler's work in this field by Philip Hardie's review of his "Roman Constructions", and through his chapters in the Martindale edited "Cambridge Companion to Virgil". From these beginnings, Hardie's own contribution to the "Roman Literature and its Contexts" series: "The Epic Successors..."; the well known book by Jamie Masters on Lucan; Henderson's articles on Lucan and Statius; and on, and on, and on. I was at the stage where I was really getting dazzled when I read E J Kenney's comments in the current Classical Review, especially as they apply to narratology. Kenney suggested that a lot of narratology is concerned with rationalising instinctive responses to texts and wondered (in regard to one of the books under review - the Horace one) whether the effort invested was commensurate with the results such approaches achieved. </FONT></DIV> <DIV align=left><FONT face="Times New Roman">O.K., now: </FONT></DIV> <DIV align=left><FONT face="Times New Roman">My own main concern here is with narratology, but I would like to get listmembers perspectives on what they feel are the pertinent theoretical approaches to Latin Literature <U>now</U>, especially Epic, especially Virgil.</FONT></DIV> <DIV align=left><FONT face="Times New Roman">1. We should start with a glib one. Am I too late? Is the work already done? </FONT></DIV> <DIV align=left><FONT face="Times New Roman">2. What are the 'classic' works which approach epic in this manner? In March Leofranc Holford-Strevens<BR>recommended the Fowler JRS articles and "Roman Constructions": what else? what are the 'best books/articles'? I need a little guidance.</FONT></DIV> <DIV align=left><FONT face="Times New Roman">Because the answer to 1 is no, 3. Aside from each approach only being as good as the book/reading/scholar who uses it what, in the opinion of the members, are the most useful approaches to Latin Epic: what has not been done, and what seems to be a good avenue to explore now.</FONT></DIV> <DIV align=left><FONT face="Times New Roman">I've been good: now it's your turn to do your part for your list brother.</FONT></DIV> <DIV align=left><FONT face="Times New Roman">I look forward to hearing from you all,</FONT></DIV> <DIV align=left><FONT face="Times New Roman">Paul Roche,</FONT></DIV> <DIV align=left><FONT face="Times New Roman">UQ</FONT></DIV> <DIV align=left><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV> <DIV align=left><FONT face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </DIV></BODY></HTML> </x-html>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Sep 19 16:39:27 2001 >From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wed Sep 19 14:30:56 2001 Received: ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) by wilsonwork.com (8.11.6) id f8JKL7Y23985; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 14:21:07 -0600 (MDT) X-Authentication-Warning: wilsonwork.com: wilsonwk set sender to [EMAIL PROTECTED] using -f Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 21:13:58 +0100 (BST) From: M W Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: VIRGIL: Chaonia Nova Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-UIDL: '#$#!g#!"!\CN!!0Q!#!
Last week's horrors remind us that we have an obligation to keep humanitas, in all its inter-related senses, alive. V often discusses political and cultural disaster. E9, where the Chaonian doves seem ineffectual when faced with the warlike eagle, is part of that discussion. In this poem, long-standing confidence has been shattered. We might think, particularly if 'audieras' in line 11 is in part addressed to the reader, that this is the very confidence which the poet himself had seemed to encourage in E1. We find in E9 that poetry itself has become fragmented (as a flock of birds might be scattered) and imperfectly remembered. People are suffering just for being in the wrong place (28), something that always happens in times of terrorism. Yet the fragments somehow coalesce, in that E9, a poem which surveys the fragments of poetry, is still one poem with its own completeness and emotional power. The eagle may arrive suddenly and disastrously, but he cannot stay for ever and the Chaonian doves will reassemble. I certainly don't want to portray V as a poet of optimism, and we have become very aware of the ways in which he is sceptical about triumph. But I think we might say that he also advises us to keep an element of scepticism about disaster in a corner of our minds - and this might be good advice. It is indeed horrible to be staring at the fragments of something that once was one. The fact that there are now only fragments testifies to the power of destruction, certainly a real power. But if the fragments themselves become the means of creation, the forces of destruction cannot have things all their own way. - Martin Hughes ----------------------------------------------------------------------- To leave the Mantovano mailing list at any time, do NOT hit reply. Instead, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message "unsubscribe mantovano" in the body (omitting the quotation marks). You can also unsubscribe at http://virgil.org/mantovano/mantovano.htm#unsub
