Copyright by Bart Anthony Natoli 2014
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Copyright by Bart Anthony Natoli 2014 The Dissertation Committee for Bart Anthony Natoli certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Speech, Community, and the Formation of Memory in the Ovidian Exilic Corpus Committee: ______________________________________ Karl Galinsky, Supervisor ______________________________________ Alessandro Barchiesi ______________________________________ Laurel Fulkerson ______________________________________ Rabun Taylor ______________________________________ L. Michael White Speech, Community, and the Formation of Memory in the Ovidian Exilic Corpus by Bart Anthony Natoli, B.A., M.A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin May 2014 uxori et filio, cum gratiis et amore Acknowlegments This dissertation results, in part, from a 2008 seminar on Ovid, conducted by Professor Karl Galinsky. During that seminar, I was allowed to explore the brilliance of the Metamorphoses as well as to foster a love for all of the works of Ovid. In regards to speech loss in particular, I was fortunate enough to be encouraged to present a small project on the reception of the topic of speech loss in the Metamorphosis of Franz Kafka. Therefore, I first must thank Karl for introducing me to the Ovidian corpus and for his encouragement and expertise in the field. There are also many other individuals whom I should thank for their insights and efforts. I thank Alessandro Barchiesi, first, for his guidance in framing my argument and for his help during the infantile stages of this paper. Next, I thank Laurel Fulkerson, Rabun Taylor, L. Michael White, and Stephen Hinds for their discerning eyes and kind words that aided the revision of my argument. Indeed, I thank the entire Classics Department at the University of Richmond for their generosity in allowing me to present an earlier version of this paper. To Mark Payne, I give thanks for insight into the place of speechlessness and animality in Ancient Rome. Finally, I thank my family, without whom this would not have been possible. To my wife, Morgan, I am indebted for her unwavering confidence and patience throughout the many editions of this paper. To my mother, Anne, I give thanks for listening to the constant successes and failures that came along with this paper. And last, I thank my son, Luca, for uplifting me with his joy and curiosity for life, attributes I have attempted to make use of in this work. v Speech, Community, and the Formation of Memory in the Ovidian Exilic Corpus Bart Anthony Natoli, Ph.D. The University of Texas at Austin, 2014 Supervisor: Karl Galinsky At Tristia 1.117-120, Ovid refers directly to his Metamorphoses, equating his exilic situation with that of characters from his magnum opus, stating that his parvus liber should report to those in Rome that the vultus of his fortune may now be listed among the mutata corpora. This statement, placed in the opening poem of Ovid’s exilic project, is invested with programmatic value and begs the following questions: How has Ovid been changed? Why does he compare himself to characters from the Metamorphoses? What exactly is the payoff – for Ovid and the audience – of such an intertextual move? This dissertation explores these questions, arguing that this line is central to Ovid’s conception of his entire ‘exilic project’. By equating himself with his earlier characters, Ovid makes himself a character who undergoes the same transformations as they did; thus, his exilic transformation should be interpreted as occurring in the same fashion as transformations in the Metamorphoses. Those transformations, it is argued, were conceived of in terms of speech, community, and memory: whenever a character is transformed, that character suffers speech loss, is exiled from community, and is forgotten. In his exilic project, Ovid portrays himself as passing through these same steps. Furthermore, Ovid depicts his transformation in this way with an eye towards memory: reformulating how his exile would be perceived by his audience and how he, as a poet, would be remembered by posterity. vi In Chapter One, I begin by 1) setting the study within current scholarly trends and 2) examining what it meant to be ‘speechless’ in Ovid’s Rome. In Chapter Two, I set out the model for speech loss and community for the characters of the Metamorphoses. In Chapter Three, I turn to how Ovid applies this model to himself in his exilic project. In Chapter Four, I connect this model to memory, arguing that Ovid focuses on this model of speech and community because he, as an exile, is attempting to place himself back within the social frameworks of his community not only to be remembered, but to be remembered as he wants to be remembered. vii Table of Contents Chapter I: Introduction………………………………...…………………….....................1 Chapter II: Speech and Community in the Metamorphoses…………...……..................50 Chapter III: Speech and Community in Ovid’s Exile Literature…..……......................127 Chapter IV: Speech, Community and the Formation of Memory….....….....................209 Appendix A: Instances of Speech Loss in the Metamorphoses………………………...268 Appendix B: Uses of mutus in Latin Literature………………………………………...269 References………………………………….…………………………………………...274 Vita.........................……………………………………….………………...........…….296 viii Chapter I: Introduction “To hide in this way was to be stripped of all self-respect. To be told to hide was a humiliation. Maybe, he thought, to live like this would be worse than death." "Then there was the publishing front, where he could take nothing for granted in spite of all his work. Publication itself was still an issue. It was not certain that he could continue in the life he had chosen, not certain that he would always find willing hands to print and distribute his work." These quotations, taken from Salman Rushdie's recently published autobiographical account of his time spent as an exile, Joseph Anton: A Memoir, represent only some of the most recent iterations of the experience of exile.1 Rushdie, placed under a fatwā in 1989 by Ayatollah Rohollah Khomeini for perceived insults against Islam in his The Satanic Verses, was forced both into hiding and into the adoption of a pseudonym: Joseph Anton. For the intensely proud and social author, the exile he describes is crushing. His identity as individual and, more importantly, as author was effectively erased: no longer could he hope to publish books or to converse with his society (both professional and personal). He had to be erased from his society, was forced to be forgotten, was made to 'play dead' simply to save himself and his loved ones from the constant death threats resulting from the fatwā. In addition to the obvious similarities (which will be discussed below) with that of Roman literature’s most famous exile, Ovid, Rushdie's account also speaks to the larger fascination with and proliferation of exile literature in modernity; for, exile has been "one of the most productive literary topics in twentieth century literature" (Gaertner 2007, 1). Perhaps the two developments most to blame for this increase in interest are 1) 1 Many thanks to Dr. L.M. White for bringing this modern reference to my attention. 1 globalization and 2) the shift of the meaning of artist and production in both the modern and postmodern sense. To the first point, the ability of electronic mass media to "collapse space and time barriers in human communication [and] to enable people to communicate on a global scale" has greatly aided in the proliferation of writings from the 'fringes' of society or from an 'exiled' writer back to his/her native land (Boldor 2005, n.1). Such emphasis features prominently in writings from the diaspora of expatriates, such as Thomas Mann, Nabokov, or Brodsky.2 As for the second point, shifting notions of artist and production have led to the use of the rhetoric of displacement, exile, and otherness to describe the authorial condition. Boldor (2005) sums up how this idea played out in terms of the modern and postmodern, stating: "Modernism relied on displacement being rooted in the idea that 'traditional' forms of art, literature, social organization and daily life had become outdated, and that it was therefore essential to sweep them aside and [to] reinvent culture – obviously, a vision diverging from 'normal' social trends. Postmodernism took these ideas even further, with its focus upon the personal, regional, etc., in short, on the alternative" (n.4). Related to this movement is the adoption of exile as a common metaphor for alienation in intellectual literature, as the intelligentsia of modernity and postmodernity frequently sought to define their own position in humanity or the human condition in general as exilic or outcast (e.g., Nietzsche, Sartre, Adorno, Nabokov).3 2 The writings on these authors are too numerous to recount here. However, these may act as starting points: Bevan et al. (1990), Roth-Souton (1994) and Spalek (1976). For the relationship between these authors – including Rushdie – to Ovid, see Kennedy 2002. 3 Nietzsche, Werke. Kritische Gesamtausgabe edd. G. Colli and Montinari vol. VII 3 p Fragmente Herbst 1884 bis Herbst 1885, 412-3. Adorno: Minima Moralia: Reflexionen aus dem beschädigten Leben (Berlin, 1951). Cf. also, Goldhill (2000), 1-7 and Eagleton, T. (1970). 2 Exile Literature and Classical Studies Against this background, the interest and discussion of exile has moved into the Classics and has resulted in a tremendous growth in scholarship on exile and, in particular, on the three most prominent writers who went into exile, the "exulum trias"4 Cicero, Ovid, and Seneca the Younger.5 Apart from the historical study of Grasmück (1978), there have been three major voices in the discussion of exile from a literary angle: Doblhofer (1987), Claassen (1999, 2008) and Gaertner (2005, 2006).