I am generally in favour of looking at ancient literature with modern methods: at least there is some useful terminology. I read an article recently on focalisation - an example of useful terminology? some might disagree - in the context of 'ope barbarica' in Aen.II (503-4). (I have lost the reference to this article; I don't know if anyone can remind me?) Aeneas uses the term OPE BARBARICA in reference to the architecture and decorative art of Troy - here V follows a predecessor, I think Naevius, in a passage that was a favourite of Cicero. Thinking of the focalisation of this phrase seems quite helpful. Does it mean: WHAT THE GREEKS CALL BARBARIC? - this makes A's words into a scornful comment on the violent 'cultural imperialism' from which he had suffered WHAT YOU (DIDO, BEING ADDRESSED HERE) CALL BARBARIC? - Dido is a Tyrian but her aesthetic sense is Greek: her Temple to Juno is clearly in Greek style. Is Aeneas acknowledging, perhaps unconsciously, a sense of underlying hostility between himself and Dido? WHAT EVEN I NOW THINK OF AS SOMEWHAT BARBARIC? Both Dido and Aeneas are easterners who have moved west - Aeneas has spent 7 years wandering in Greek-influenced places. In this sense the word conveys some solidarity with Dido rather than hostility to her, and perhaps conveys even more strongly a sense of anguish that Aeneas now, even with all his resentments against the Greeks, is beginning to think in Greek ways. All these three focalisations can be combined to give this startling word something like its full (?) meaning. - Martin Hughes
On Sun, 16 Sep 2001, Paul Roche wrote: > Dear Listmembers, > 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. > First up: > 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 - http://www.cisi.unito.it/arachne/num2/fowler.html). I am very > 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. > O.K., now: > 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 now, especially Epic, especially Virgil. > 1. We should start with a glib one. Am I too late? Is the work already done? > 2. What are the 'classic' works which approach epic in this manner? In March > Leofranc Holford-Strevens > recommended the Fowler JRS articles and "Roman Constructions": what else? > what are the 'best books/articles'? I need a little guidance. > 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. > I've been good: now it's your turn to do your part for your list brother. > I look forward to hearing from you all, > Paul Roche, > UQ > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
