A new translation of Horace Odes
3.11:
O Mercury, from whom Amphion
learned his skill
to build Thebes’ walls with stones
by music moved,
from lyre of tortoise shell let
songs sound forth
through strumming well-tuned
strings.
Once silent and unwanted but now
dear
to holy shrines and rich men’s
groaning boards –
sing forth your song till Lyde’s
stubborn ear
will turn this way and hear
who like a mare of three years old
will play
and frisk on open plains and take
no part
in mating, up to now she boldly
thinks
herself too young for love.
You lead the tiger and the woods
themselves.
swift rivers halt their flow for
you,
Cerberus, monstrous Underworld
guard,
will yield to your sweet song.
Tityos and Ixion brightened then.
The urns of the Danaean girls
stood dry, their watery load had
had drained away,
their holders held by verse.
May Lyde contemplate the virgins’
crime,
their guilt there marked by all
their urns,
whose water drained as fast as it
went in.
This was their punishment
and thus the guilty after death
still pay.
Those sinners (how could they have
been more vile?)
who with sharp iron blades did
take
the lives of their own mates.
Just one of many honored marriage
vows,
proved false to her own father’s
treachery
and won acclaim, a faithful bride
renowned
for ages yet to come.
“Get up!” she told her youthful
mate,
“Get up or else you’ll sleep a
lengthy sleep
you don’t see coming. Flee my sire
and sisters who mean ill,
and who like lions seizing calves
– alas! –
one at a time while I, more mild
in heart,
will neither wound you nor will I
aim
to hold you in durance.
My father may confine me with
cruel chains
for mercifully having spared my
mate
or he may banish me and make my
home
remote Numidia.
Run off as far as feet and winds
can carry you
while night and Venus aid your
flight. Run off
while still you can and see my
sorry fate’s
recorded on my tomb."
Reading certain
Horatian odes resembles contemplating a box by Joseph Cornell. One sees in his Ode 3.11, for example, a
meticulously constructed elegant little arrangement of objects or images attractive
in itself but elusive in meaning with the context enhancing the connotative tendency
of each element. Part of what lends
Horace’s references their rich suggestiveness is the fact that, apart from the mentions
of Lyde, apparently a friend of the poet, the ode takes place entirely in the
mythic realm.
The poem is curiously doubled and self-reflexive. The author seems to have intentionally introduced obscurities and contradictions. To begin with, the poem has two themes, each accorded roughly equal space. The first is self-reflective, the enchanting power of song, illustrated by Amphion’s music with which he razed the walls of Thebes, by the social prestige of poetry in religion and symposia, and by mythic references to the power of Orpheus’ playing to charm not only nature but even Cerberus and the sufferers in the underworld. In a form of sympathetic magic, by claiming supernatural power for poetry the writer thereby predicts the success of this particular verse.
The claim of art’s
persuasiveness provides a bridge to the second theme, the proper management
of erotic energy. The poet condemns mythic
figures that offended against love –Ixion, and Tityos and, most prominently, the
Danaean women who killed their spouses, all toward the end of convincing Lyde
of the value of marriage and a conventional family life. Horace provides a little horror show to
reinforce poetry’s teaching by indicating the penalties for spurning the
natural destiny of maturation in married love.
Stanza five, which would be a digitally animated sequence in a film,
presents a luridly threatening Cerberus, a shocker itself, but also a reinforcement of the poet’s admonitions later.
The reader then is introduced to the theme of proper love relations with
glimpses of the punishment in Hades of two others who had offended against
marriage, Ixion by attempting adultery with the worst of all possible choices,
the wife of the king of the gods, and Tityos for having attempted to rape Leto at
the behest of that same goddess.
This theme is supported as well by the story of the Danaïdes and of Hypermnestra’s saving her
husband Lynceus. There could scarcely be
a less dutiful wife than one who murders her mate, and the reference seem
overdone for the speaker’s message to the young Lyde. The poem, though a sort of love advice, is
more concerned with propriety than with eros, but even in this simple normative
recommendation of marriage, it is hardly straightforward. To begin with, the name of Lyde, the woman to
whom the ode is addressed, has confused some readers. The name is used for a ἑταίρα by several
poets. It is the name of Antimachos’
mistress and the title of his elegiac poem upon her death. Athenaeus 13.597 mentions another courtesan
of the same name and Horace himself mentions a ἑταίρα of the name in 2.11. (Another reference in 1.23 is less certainly
a courtesan, but there Lyde’s characterization in part resembles that in 3.11.) Considering that the lesson the poet implores
her to hear is to prepare for a respectable marriage and the role of a dutiful
wife, this could hardly be a message for a courtesan. The use of Hypermnestra as his exemplum is
problematic in any event, though she was a spouse to Lynceus and with him
founded the Danaid line that led to Perseus.
Having been coerced unwillingly
into marriage, she is inappropriate as a model bride, however loyal a
wife she proved to be.
Horace’s Lyde is
said to behave like a young filly playing in a field, active and healthy, while
resisting the subjugation to a husband that would come with marriage. This characterization makes inevitable the
picture of her as a teen-aged girl, wholly inexperienced in love and dubious
about relationships, perhaps the daughter of a friend.
For all the structural play, irony, and semantic disjunctions, the thematics of the ode persist. Horace’s boasts about the power of poetry resemble the claims of poets from the revelations of shamans in archaic times to Wallace Stevens “Notes Toward a Supreme Fiction,” but here they are hobbled as it were by the incongruities of the poetic argument. Lyde is a misleading name and Hypermnestra an ill-fitting example of ideal marriage. Such slippage renders the poet’s claims faintly ironic, while the hellish horrors seem exaggerated and out of place. Naive and shy, Lyde is even less likely than the average wife to commit murder as the Danaïdes had done
Still at base the
ode does represent a social consensus endorsing monogamous marriage as the
fundamental building block of society.
Without such stabilizing institutions, violence and force would prevail,
suggested by the multiple murders of Aegyptus’ sons and the apparition of Cerberus. Attitudes in support of marriage include the
notions of respectability and propriety added to the age-old advice govern by
an elder generation to the younger one just coming of age, “It is time to grow
up now and act like an adult.” The
frightening pictures of the hellish dog and the torments of the condemned are
nothing but the superego of a patriarchal system enforcing order through terror.
These meanings
are present in the ode, but they jostle one another uneasily. Self-questioning, they feature cracks and
flaws. Yet the structure of the whole,
the arrangement of symbolic objects from the world of myth, placed precisely to
react against one another, is well-balanced so that all the elements of the
problem of married love are included: not just the young woman’s reluctance to
form a household, but also coercion from parents (Danaus and Aegyptus) and
uncontrolled lust (in the figures of Ixion and Tityos). The entire system of the universe, it is
suggested, supports the marriage institution, assuring a sorry fate for those
who defy their proper role and destiny. Horace’s
essentially poetic gifts are fully displayed as he renders what amounts to an
admonition to behave in a dynamic field of competing demands of the ego:
Amphion’s drive for power, Lyde’s desire to cling to childhood, the destructive
lust of Ixion and Tityos, the coercive parental demands, the murderous potential
of the reluctant wives, and the fidelity of Hypermnestra. All these passions are on full display, while
the reader hears nothing whatever of the joys of either nuptial or illicit
love-making. Who but Horace could build
such a dynamic semantic field while simply recommending the most ordinary
behavior?
No comments:
Post a Comment