This demonstration evidently forms the basis of D.’s overall argument, as he intends to show that Ovid’s love poetry was deeply anti-Augustan and therefore needs to firmly establish the existence of such categories. strongly opposes the idea that such judgments might only reflect the reader’s own commitment. This is why, according to D., modern scholars are entitled to distinguish pro- and anti-Augustan texts and works: D. 1 Relying on Augustus’ Res Gestae and some texts from Tacitus’ Annales, he asserts that the opposition between pro- and anti-Augustan stances, far from being a modern reconstruction, is deeply rooted in Roman perceptions of the politics of the period. Kennedy’s now classic article and dismisses Kennedy’s skepticism about the relevance of such terms. In the second chapter (“Conflicting Evaluations of Augustus”, 9-22), he defines the criteria according to which an author may be described as pro- or anti-Augustan. rigorously aims at proving that Augustan ideology was explicit enough to enable contemporary authors to take sides with or against it. The two following chapters constitute a preliminary analysis for D.’s readings of Ovid’s love poetry: as it will be interpreted as anti-Augustan, D. Consequently, the poet can assert that his works have done nothing but what had been done for ages by every Greek or Roman author and that, since none of them had ever been condemned, his punishment was out of proportion with his actions. shows how Ovid constructs a new literary history in order to neatly relate it to erotic themes. This defense is used in the chapters which follow to read the poems defended here. The first chapter (” Tristia 2: Defending Love Poetry”, 1-8) starts with the end of the story and examines Ovid’s pleas for his own erotic works in Tristia 2. intends to focus on Ovid’s writings and their relationship with Augustan ideology and to show that the former’s erotic poetry discloses an anti-Augustan point of view on Roman identity. Excluding from his scope the biographical aspects of Augustus’ and Ovid’s conflict and refusing to consider the error, which allegedly partly justified the poet’s exile, D. The short preface sets out the issues that the book confronts. The final section in every chapter, which sums up its main points and explicitly states the author’s argument, may compensate for the absence of an overall conclusion. A preface precedes the development of the general argument, but there is no conclusion, only a final chapter which is called an epilogue. The notes at the end of the volume offer useful references and, occasionally, some discussions with other scholars. The volume also includes two rich indices, an index locorum and a general index, and an extensive bibliography. Davis (hereafter D.) revises some articles published between 19, presenting fresh material both in these revisions and in four new chapters. Ovid's Ars amatoria, a didactic poem purporting to instruct first men and then women on the arts of seduction, is thought to have been the offensive song (Latin: carmen).This book is an attempt to decipher the political innuendos and references in Ovid’s erotic poetry. Augustus banished his granddaughter Julia and Ovid in the same year, CE 8. It is assumed that the carmen et error had something to do with Augustus' moral reforms and/or the princeps' promiscuous daughter Julia. Ovid says he saw something he should not have seen. Ovid's plaintive appeals in his writing from exile at Tomi, on the Black Sea, are less entertaining than his mythological and amatory writing and are also frustrating because, while we know Augustus exiled a 50-year-old Ovid for carmen et error, we don't know exactly what his grave mistake was, so we get an unsolvable puzzle and a writer consumed with self-pity who once was the height of wit, a perfect dinner party guest.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |