The Art Of Poetry An Epistle To The Pisos
H >>
Horace >> The Art Of Poetry An Epistle To The Pisos
Pages:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 | 7 |
8 |
9
The distinction made by _De Nores_ of _the satyrs_ not making a part of
the tragedy, but barely appearing between the acts, can only signify,
that the Tragick and Comick Scenes were kept apart from each other. This
is plain from his laying that they held the place of the Chorus; not
sustaining their continued part in the tragick dialogue, but filling
their chief office of singing between the acts. The antient Tragedy was
one continued representation, divided into acts by the Chant of _the
CHORUS_; and, otherwise, according to modern ideas, forming _but one
act_, without any interruption of the performance.
These antient Satyrick songs, with which the antient Tragedians
endeavoured to enliven the Dithyrambicks, gave rise to two different
species of poetry. Their rude jests and petulant raillery engendered
_the Satire_; and their sylvan character produced _the Pastoral_.
328.--THO' RUDE, THE GRAVER MOOD UNBROKE--
Stript the rough Satyrs, and ESSAYED A JOKE
--Agrestes Satyros nudavis, & asper,
INCOLUMI GRAVITATE, jocum tentavit.
"It hath been shewn, that the poet could not intend, in these lines, to
_fix the origin of the satiric drama_. But, though this be certain, and
the dispute concerning that point be thereby determined, yet it is to
be noted, that he purposely describes the satire in its ruder and less
polished form; glancing even at some barbarities, which deform the
Bacchic chorus; which was properly the satiric piece, before Aeschylus
had, by his regular constitution of the drama, introduced it under a very
different form on the stage. The reason of this conduit is given in
_n._ on l. 203. Hence the propriety of the word _nudavit_, which
Lambin rightly interprets, _nudos introduxit satyres,_ the poet hereby
expressing the monstrous indecorum of this entertainment in its first
unimproved state. Alluding also to this ancient character of the
_satire,_ he calls him _asper,_ i.e. rude and petulant; and even adds,
that his jests were intemperate, and _without the least mixture of
gravity._ For thus, upon the authority of a very ingenious and learned
critic, I explain _incolumi gravitate,_ i. e. rejecting every thing
serious, bidding _farewell,_ as we may say, _to all gravity._ Thus [L.
in. O. 5.].
_Incolumi Jove et urbe Roma:_
i.e. bidding farewell to Jupiter [Capitolinus] and Rome; agreeably to
what is said just before,
_Anciliorum et neminis et togae
OBLITUS, aeternaeque Vestae._
or, as salvus is used more remarkably in Martial [I. v. 10.]
_Ennius est lectus salvo tibi, Roma, Marone:
Et sua riserunt secula Maeonidem._
"_Farewell, all gravity, is as remote from the original sense of the
words _fare well,_ as _incolumi gravitate_ from that of _incolumis, or
salvo Morona_ from that of _salvas._"
Notes on the Art of Poetry.
The beginning of this note does not, I think, perfectly accord with what
has been urged by the same Critick in the note immediately preceding; He
there observed, that the "satyr here spoken of, is, _in all respects,_
a regular Drama, and therefore _could not be of earlier date,_ than the
times of Aeschylus.
Here, however, he allows, though in subdued phrase, that, "though this
be certain, and the dispute concerning that point thereby determined,_
yet it is to be noted, _that he purposely describes the satyr_ in its
ruder and less polished form; _glancing even at some barbarities, which
deform_ the bacchic chorus; which was properly the Satyrick piece,
_before_ Aeschylus had, by his regular constitution of the Drama,
introduced it, _under a very different form,_ on the stage." In
a subsequent note, the same learned Critick also says, that "the
connecting particle, _verum, [verum ita risores, &c.]_ expresses the
opposition intended between the _original satyr_ and that which the Poet
approves." In both these passages the ingenious Commentator seems, from
the mere influence of the context, to approach to the interpretation
that I have hazarded of this passage, avowedly one of the most obscure
parts of the Epistle. The explanation of the words incolumi gravitate,
in the latter part of the above note, though favourable to the system of
the English Commentary, is not only contrary to the construction of all
other interpreters, and, I believe, unwarranted by any acceptation of
the word _incolumis,_ but, in my opinion, less elegant and forcible
than the common interpretation.
The line of the Ode referred to,
INCOLUMI _Jove, et urbe Roma?_
was never received in the sense, which the learned Critick assigns to
it.
The Dauphin Editor interprets it,
STANTE _urbe, & Capitolino Jove Romanos protegente._
Schrevelius, to the same effect, explains it,
SALVO _Capitolio, quae Jovis erat sedes._
These interpretations, as they are certainly the most obvious, seem also
to be most consonant to the plain sense of the Poet.
330.--_For holiday spectators, flush'd and wild,
With new conceits and mummeries were beguil'd.
Quippe erat_ ILLECEBRIS, _&c._
Monsieur Dacier, though he allows that "all that is here said by Horace
proves _incontestibly_, that the Satyrick Piece had possession of the
Roman stage;" _tout ce qu' Horace dit icy prouve_ incontestablement
_qu'il y avoit des Satyres_; yet thinks that Horace lavished all these
instructions on them, chiefly for the sake of the atellane fables. The
author of the English Commentary is of the same opinion, and labours
the point very assiduously. I cannot, however, discover, in any part
of Horace's discourse on _the_ satyrs, one expression glancing towards
_the_ atellanes, though their oscan peculiarities might easily have been
marked, so as not to be mistaken.
335.--_That_ GOD _or_ HERO _of the lofty scene,
May not, &c.
Ne quicumque_ DEUS, _&c._
The Commentators have given various explanations of this precept. _De
Nores_ interprets it to signify _that the same actor, who represented a
God or Hero in the_ Tragick _part of the Drama, must not be employed
to represent a Faun or Sylvan in the_ Satyrick. _Dacier has a strange
conceit concerning the joint performance of a _Tragedy_ and _Atellane_
at one time, the same God or Hero being represented as the principal
subject and character of both; on which occasion, (says he) the Poet
recommends to the author not to debase the God, or Hero of _the_
Tragedy, by sinking his language and manners too low in _the_ atellane;
whose stile, as well as measure, should be peculiar to itself, equally
distant from Tragedy and Farce.
The author of the English Commentary tells us, that "Gods and Heroes
were introduced as well into the _Satyrick_ as _Tragick_ Drama, and
often the very same Gods and Heroes, which had born a part in THE
PRECEDING TRAGEDY; a practice, which Horace, I suppose, intended, by
this hint, to recommend as most regular."
The two short notes of Schrevelius, in my opinion, more clearly explain
the sense of Horace, and are in these words.
_Poema serium, jocis_ Satyricis _ita_ commiscere--_ne seilicet is, qui
paulo ante_ DEI _instar aut_ herois _in scenam fuit introductus, postea
lacernosus prodeat._
On the whole, supposing _the_ Satyrick _Piece_ to be _Tragi-Comick_, as
Dacier himself seems half inclined to believe, the precept of Horace
only recommends to the author so to support his principal personage,
that his behaviour in the Satyrick scenes shall not debase the character
he has sustained in the TRAGICK. No specimen remaining of the Roman
Satyrick Piece, I may be permitted to illustrate the rule of Horace by a
brilliant example from the _seroi-comick_ Histories of the Sovereign
of our Drama. The example to which I point, is the character of _the_
Prince _of_ Wales, in the two Parts of _Henry the Fourth_, Such a
natural and beautiful decorum is maintained in the display of that
character, that the _Prince_ is as discoverable in the loose scenes with
Falstaff and his associates, as in the Presence Chamber, or the closet.
after _the natural_, though mixt dramas, of Shakespear, and Beaumont and
Fletcher, had prevailed on our stage, it is surprising that our
progress to _pure_ Tragedy and Comedy, should have been interrupted, or
disturbed, by _the regular monster of_ Tragi-comedy, nursed by Southerne
and Dryden.
346.--LET ME NOT, PISOS, IN THE SYLVIAN SCENE, USE ABJECT TERMS ALONE,
AND PHRASES MEAN]
_Non ego_ INORNATA & DOMINANTIA, &c.
The author of the English Commentary proposes a conjectural emendation
of Horace's text--honodrata instead of inornata--and accompanied with a
new and elevated sense assigned to the word dominantia. This last word
is interpreted in the same manner by _de Nores_. Most other Commentators
explain it to signify _common words_, observing its analogy to the Greek
term [Greek: kuria]. The same expression prevails in our own tongue--_a_
reigning _word_, _a reigning _fashion_, &c. the general cast of _the_
satyr, seems to render a caution against a lofty stile not very
necessary; yet it must be acknowledged that such a caution is given by
the Poet, exclusive of the above proposed variation.
_Ne quicumque_ DEUS------
_Migret in obscuras_ HUMILI SERMONE _tabernas_,
_Aut dum vitat humum_, NUBES & INANIA CAPTET.
350.--_Davus may jest, &c.]--Davusne loquatur, &c._
It should seem from hence, that the common characters of Comedy, as well
as the Gods and Heroes of Tragedy, had place in _the_ Satyrick Drama,
cultivated in the days of Horace. Of the manner in which the antient
writers sustained the part of Silenus, we may judge from _the_ CYCLOPS
of Euripides, and _the_ Pastorals of Virgil.
Vossius attempts to shew from some lines of this part of the Epistle,
[_Ne quicumque Deus, &c._] that _the_ satyrs were _subjoined_ to the
Tragick scenes, not _incorporated_ with them: and yet at the same moment
he tells us, and with apparent approbation, that Diomedes quotes
our Poet to prove that they were blended with each other: _simul ut
spectator_, inter res tragicas, seriasque, satyrorum quoque jocis, &
lusibus, _delectaretur_.
I cannot more satisfactorily conclude all that I have to urge, on the
subject of the Satyrick Drama, as here described by Horace, than by one
more short extract from the notes of the ingenious author of the English
Commentary, to the substance of which extract I give the most full
assent. "The Greek Drama, we know, had its origin from the loose,
licentious raillery of the rout of Bacchus, indulging to themselves the
freest follies of taunt and invective, as would best suit to lawless
natures, inspirited by festal mirth, and made extravagant by wine. Hence
arose, and with a character answering to this original, the _Satiric
Drama_; the spirit of which was afterwards, in good measure, revived
and continued in the Old Comedy, and itself preferred, though with
considerable alteration in the form, through all the several periods of
the Greek stage; even when Tragedy, which arose out of it, was brought
to its last perfection."
368.--_To a short syllable, a long subjoin'd, Forms an _IAMBICK FOOT.]
_Syllaba longa, brevi subjetta, vocatur Iambus._
Horace having, after the example of his master Aristotle, slightly
mentioned the first rise of Tragedy in the form of _a_ Choral Song,
subjoining an account of _the_ Satyrick Chorus, that was _soon_ (mox
_etiam_) combined with it, proceeds to speak particularly of the Iambick
verse, which he has before mentioned generally, as the measure best
accommodated to the Drama. In this instance, however, the Poet has
trespassed against _the order and method_ observed by his philosophical
guide; and by that trespass broken the thread of his history of the
Drama, which has added to the difficulty and obscurity of this part of
his Epistle. Aristotle does not speak of _the_ Measure, till he
has brought Tragedy, through all its progressive stages, from the
Dithyrambicks, down to its establishment by Aeschylus and Sophocles. If
the reader would judge of the _poetical beauty_, as well as _logical
precision_, of such an arrangement, let him transfer this section of the
Epistle [beginning, in the original at v. 251. and ending at 274.]
to the end of the 284th line; by which transposition, or I am much
mistaken, he will not only disembarrass this historical part of it,
relative to the Grascian stage, but will pass by a much easier, and more
elegant, transition, to the Poet's application of the narrative to the
Roman Drama,
The English reader, inclined to make the experiment, must take the lines
of the translation from v. 268. to v. 403, both inclusive, and insert
them after v. 418.
_In shameful silence loft the pow'r to wound._
It is further to be observed that this detail on _the_ IAMBICK is not,
with strict propriety, annext to a critical history of _the_ SATYR,
in which, as Aristotle insinuates insinuates, was used _the_ Capering
_Tetrameter_, and, as the Grammarians observe, _Trisyllabicks_.
394.--PISOS! BE GRAECIAN MODELS, &c.]
Pope has imitated and illustrated this passage.
Be Homer's works your study and delight,
Read them by day, and meditate by night;
Thence form your judgment, thence your maxims bring,
And trace the Muses upwards to their spring.
Still with itself compar'd, his text peruse!
And let your comment be the Mantuan Muse!
_Essay on Criticism._
404.--A KIND OF TRAGICK ODE, UNKNOWN BEFORE,
THESPIS, 'TIS SAID, INVENTED FIRST.
IGNOTUM _Tragicae_ GENUS INVENISSE _Camaenae_
_Dicitur, &c._
It is surprising that Dacier, who, in a controversial note, in
refutation of Heinsius, has so properly remarked Horace's adherence to
Aristotle, should not have observed that his history of the Drama opens
and proceeds nearly in the same order. Aristotle indeed does not name
Thespis, but we cannot but include his improvements among the changes,
to which the Critick refers, before Tragedy acquired a permanent form
under _AEschylus_. Thespis seems not only to have embodied _the_ CHORUS,
but to have provided a theatrical apparatus for an itinerant exhibition;
to have furnished disguises for his performers, and to have broken the
continuity of _the_ CHORUS by an _Interlocutor_; to whom AEschylus
adding another personage, thereby first created Dramatick Dialogue;
while at the same time by a _further diminution of the_ CHORUS, by
improving the dresses of the actors, and drawing them from their
travelling waggon to a fixt stage, he created _a regular theatre_.
It appears then that neither Horace, nor Aristotle, ascribe _the origin_
of Tragedy to Thespis. the Poet first mentions the rude beginning of
Tragedy, (_carmen tragicum_) _the_ Goat-song; he then speaks of _the
Satyrick Chorus_, soon after interwoven with it; and then proceeds
to the _improvements_ of these Bacchic Festivities, by Thespis, and
AEschylus; though their perfection and final establishment is ascribed
by Aristotle to Sophocles. Dacier very properly renders this passage,
_On dit que Thespis fut le premier jui inventa une especi de tragedie
auparavant inconnue aux Grecs._ Thespis is said to be the first inventor
of a species of Tragedy, before unknown to the Greeks.
Boileau seems to have considered this part of the Epistle in the same
light, that I have endeavoured to place it.
La Tragedie informe & grossiere au naissant
n'etoit qu'un simple Choeur, ou chacun en danfant,
et du Dieu des Raisins entonnant les louanges,
s'essorcoit d'attirer de fertiles vendanges.
la le vin et la joie eveillant les esprits,
_du plus habile chantre un Bouc etoit le prix._
Thespis sut le premier, qui barbouille de lie,
promena par les bourgs cette heureuse folie;
et d'acteurs mal ornes chargeant un tombereau,
amusa les passans d'un spectacle nouveau.
aeschyle dans le Choeur jetta les personages;
d'un masque plus honnete habilla les visages:
sur les ais d'un Theatre en public exhausse,
fit paroitre l'acteur d'un brodequin chausse.
L'art poetique, _chant troisieme._
417.--_the sland'rous Chorus drown'd In shameful silence, lost the pow'r
to wound._
Chorusque turpiter obticuit, _sublato jure nocendi._
"Evidently because, though the _jus nocendi_ was taken away, yet that
was no good reason why the Chorus should entirely cease. M. Dacier
mistakes the matter. _Le choeur se tut ignominuesement, parce-que la
hi reprimasa licence, et que ce sut, a proprement parler, la hi qui le
bannit; ce qu' Horace regarde comme une espece de sietrissure. Properly
speaking,_ the law only abolished the abuse of the chorus. The ignominy
lay in dropping the entire use of it, on account of this restraint.
Horace was of opinion, that the chorus ought to have been retained,
though the state had abridged it of the licence, it so much delighted
in, of an illimited, and intemperate satire, _Sublatus chorus fuit,_
says Scaliger, _cujus illae videntur esse praecipuae partet, ut
potissimum ques liberet, laedertnt."
Notes on the Art of Poetry._ If Dacier be mistaken in this instance, his
mistake is common to all the commentators; not one of whom, the learned
and ingenious author of the above he excepted, has been able to extract
from these words any marks of Horace's predilection in favour of a
Chorus, or censure of "its culpable omission" in Comedy. De Nores
expresses the general sense of the Criticks on this passage.
[Turpiter.] _Quia lex, declarata Veteris Conaetdiae scriptorum
improbitate, a maledicendi licentia deterruit.--Sicuti enim antea
summa cum laude Vetus Comediae, accepta est, ita postea summa est cum
turpitudine vetantibus etiam legibus repudiata, quia probis hominibus,
quia sapientibus, quia inte*s maledixerit. Quare Comaediae postea
conscriptae ad hujusce Veteris differentiam sublato choro, novae
appellatae sunt._
What Horace himself says on a similar occasion, of the suppression of
the Fescennine verses, in the Epistle to Augustus, is perhaps the best
comment on this passage.
--quin etiam lex
Paenaque lata, malo quae nollet carmine quenquam--
describi: vertere modum formindine fustis
ad bene dicendum delectandumque redacti.
421.---Daring their Graecian masters to forsake,
And for their themes domestick glories take.
Nec minimum meruere decus, vestigia Graeca
Ausi deserere, & celebrare domestica facta.
The author of the English Commentary has a note on this passage, replete
with fine taste, and sound criticism.
"This judgment of the poet, recommending domestic subjects, as fittest
for the stage, may be inforced from many obvious reasons. As, 1. that
it renders the drama infinitely more _affecting:_ and this on many
accounts, 1. As a subject, taken from our own annals, must of course
carry with it an air of greater probability, at least to the generality
of the people, than one borrowed from those of any other nation. 2.
As we all find a personal interest in the subject. 3. As it of course
affords the best and easiest opportunities of catching our minds, by
frequent references to our manners, prejudices, and customs. And of how
great importance this is, may be learned from hence, that, even in that
exhibition of foreign characters, dramatic writers have found themselves
obliged to sacrifice sacrifice truth and probability to the humour of
the people, and to dress up their personages, contrary to their own
better judgment, in some degree according to the mode and manners of
their respective countries [Footnote: "L'etude egale des poetes de
differens tems a plaire a leurs spectateurs, a encore inssue dans la
maniere de peindre les caracteres. Ceux qui paroissent sur la scene
Angloise, Espagnols, Francoise, sont plus Anglois, Espagnols, ou
Francois que Grecs ou Romains, en un mot que ce qu'ils doivent etre. II
ne faut qu'en peu de discernement pour s'appercevoir que nos Cesars et
nos Achilles, en gardant meme un partie de leur charactere primitif,
prennent droit de naturalite dans le pais ou ils sont transplantez,
semblables a ces portraits, qui sortent de la main d'un peintre Flamand,
Italien, ou Francois, et qui portent l'empreinte du pais. On veut plaire
a sa nation, et rien ne plait tant que le resemblance de manieres et de
enie." P. Brumoy, vol. i. p. 200.] And, 4. as the writer himself, from an
intimate acquaintance with the character and genius of his own nation,
will be more likely to draw the manners with life and spirit.
"II. Next, which should ever be one great point in view, it renders the
drama more generally useful in its moral destination. For, it being
conversant about domestic acts, the great instruction of the fable more
sensibly affects us; and the characters exhibited, from the part we
take in their good or ill qualities, will more probably influence our
conduct.
"III. Lastly, this judgment will deserve the greater regard, as the
conduct recommended was, in fact, the practice of our great models, the
Greek writers; in whose plays, it is observable, there is scarcely a
single scene, which lies out of the confines of Greece.
"But, notwithstanding these reasons, the practice hath, in all times,
been but little followed. The Romans, after some few attempts in this
way (from whence the poet took the occasion of delivering it as a
dramatic precept), soon relapsed into their old use; as appears from
Seneca's, and the titles of other plays, written in, or after the
Augustan age. Succeeding times continued the same attachment to Grecian,
with the addition of an equal fondness for Roman, subjects. The reason
in both instances hath been ever the same: that strong and early
prejudice, approaching somewhat to adoration, in favour of the
illustrious names of those two great states. The account of this matter
is very easy; for their writings, as they furnish the business of our
younger, and the amusement of our riper, years; and more especially make
the study of all those, who devote themselves to poetry and the stage,
insensibly infix in us an excessive veneration for all affairs in which
they were concerned; insomuch, that no other subjects or events seem
considerable enough, or rise, in any proportion, to our ideas of the
dignity of the tragic scene, but such as time and long admiration have
consecrated in the annals of their story. Our Shakespeare was, I think,
the first that broke through this bondage of classical superstition. And
he owed this felicity, as he did some others, to his want of what is
called the advantage of a learned education. Thus uninfluenced by the
weight of early prepossession, he struck at once into the road of nature
and common sense: and without designing, without knowing it, hath
left us in his historical plays, with all their anomalies, an exacter
resemblance of the Athenian stage, than is any where to be found in its
most processed admirers and copyists.
"I will only add, that, for the more successful execution of this rule
of celebrating domestic acts, much will depend on the aera, from
whence the subject is taken. Times too remote have almost the same
inconveniences, and none of the advantages, which attend the ages
of Greece and Rome. And for those of later date, they are too much
familiarized to us, and have not as yet acquired that venerable cast and
air, which tragedy demands, and age only can give. There is no fixing
this point with precision. In the general, that aera is the fittest for
the poet's purpose, which, though fresh enough in pure minds to warm and
interest us in the event of the action, is yet at so great a distance
from the present times, as to have lost all those mean and disparaging
circumstances, which unavoidably adhere to recent deeds, and, in some
measure, sink the noblest modern transactions to the level of ordinary
life."
_Notes on the Art of Poetry._
The author of the essay on the writings and genius of Pope elegantly
forces a like opinion, and observes that Milton left a list of
thirty-three subjects for Tragedy, all taken from the English Annals.
423.--_Whether the gown prescrib'd a stile more mean,
or the inwoven purple rais'd the scene.
Vel qui praetextas, vel qui docuere togatas._
The gown (_Toga_) being the common Roman habit, signisies _Comedy;_
and the inwoven purple _(praetexta)_ being appropriated to the higher
orders, refers to Tragedy. _Togatae_ was also used as a general term to
denote all plays, which the habits, manners, and arguments were Roman;
those, of which the customs and subjects were Graecian, like the Comedies
of Terence, were called _Palliatae_.
429.--But you, bright heirs of the Pompilian Blood,
Never the verse approve, &c.
Vos, O Pompilius Sanguis, &c.
The English commentary exhibits a very just and correct analysis of this
portion of the Epistle, but neither here, nor in any other part of it,
observes the earnestness with which the poet, on every new topick,
addresses his discourse _the Pisos;_ a practice, that has not passed
unnoticed by other commentators.
[On this passage De Nores writes thus. _Vos O Pompilius Sanguis!] Per
apostrophen_ sermonem convertit ad pisones, eos admonens, ut sibi
caveant _ab bujusmodi romanorum poetarum errore videtur autem_ eos ad
attentionem excitare _dum ait, Vos O! et quae sequntur._
Pages:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 | 7 |
8 |
9