Ovid's Metamorphoses in Twentieth-Century Italian Literature

alberto comparini (Ed.)

Ovid’s comparini Metamorphoses in Twentieth-Century comparini (Ed.) Ovid’s Metamorphoses (Ed.) in Twentieth-Century Italian Literature Italian Literature

his book aims to show the metamorphic nature of Ovid’s reception in twentieth-century Italian literature.

It is a study of the aesthetic effects of Ovid’s poetics Italian Literature in Twentieth-Century Ovid’s Metamorphoses within both the novel and poetry tradition in Italy. By using a historical and philological methodology, the authors of each essay have shown the hermeneutic power of Ovid, read as a constant intertextual presence. From Giovanni Pascoli to Eugenio Montale, from Italo Calvino to Antonio Tabucchi, in this book Ovid’s reception is finally shown to be as important as Virgil’s and offers new important tools in order to understand the role of Latin literature in the twentieth century.

Universitätsverlag winter isbn 978-3-8253-6788-6 Heidelberg bibliothek der klassischen altertumswissenschaften

Herausgegeben von jürgen paul schwindt

Neue Folge · 2. Reihe · Band 157 alberto comparini (Ed.)

Ovid’s Metamorphoses in Twentieth-Century Italian Literature

Universitätsverlag winter Heidelberg Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.d-nb.de abrufbar.

cover illustration © Barbara Heinisch: Prozessmalerei im Düsseldorfer Atelier mit der Tänzerin Sayonara Pereira, 1992, Privatsammlung, Gelsenkirchen, Nutzung und Bildbearbeitung gemäß Creative Commons-Lizenz cc by-sa 3.0 https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=36243658

isbn 978-3-8253-6788-6

Dieses Werk einschließlich aller seiner Teile ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung außerhalb der engen Grenzen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes ist ohne Zustimmung des Verlages unzulässig und strafbar. Das gilt insbesondere für Vervielfältigungen, Übersetzungen, Mikroverﬁlmungen und die Einspeicherung und Verarbeitung in elektronischen Systemen. © 2018 Universitätsverlag Winter GmbH Heidelberg Imprimé en Allemagne · Printed in Germany Druck: Memminger MedienCentrum, 87700 Memmingen Gedruckt auf umweltfreundlichem, chlorfrei gebleichtem und alterungsbeständigem Papier. Den Verlag erreichen Sie im Internet unter: www.winter-verlag.de Notes

Maria Massucco translated from Italian the essays by Raffaella Bertazzoli, Massimo Co- lella, Lucilla Lijoi, and Rosalba Galvagno. Maria was also responsible for revising the essays by Sergio Casali, Francesca Irene Sensini, Alessandro Giammei, Laura Bardelli, Barbara Olla, Alberto Comparini, Bart van den Bossche, and Vilma De Gasperin, which were written in English. Dylan Montanari translated from Italian the essays by Susanna Pietrosanti and Ales- sandro Fo. With Maria Massucco, he translated and revised the introduction by Alberto Comparini.

Unless otherwise indicated, Ovid’s texts are cited from the following editions:

Ovid: Epistulae ex Ponto, ed. by John Richmond, Stuttgart and Leipzig 1990;

Ovid: Amores, Medicamina Faciei Femineae, Ars Amatoria, Remedia Amoris, ed. by Ed- ward John Kenney, Oxford 1994;

Ovid: Tristia, ed. by John Barrie Hall, Stuttgart and Leipzig 1995;

Ovid: Fasti, ed. by Donald Wormell Alton, Donald Ernest Wilson Wormell, and Edward Courtney, Stuttgart and Leipzig 1997;

Ovid: Metamorphoses, ed. by Richard Tarrant, Oxford 2004. 6 Titolo capitolo Contents 7

Acknowkledgments

First of all, I would like to thank the DLCL (Division of Literatures, Cultures, and Lan- guages) and Stanford University’s Department of French & Italian for having made the publication of this book possible. My sincere thanks to Laura Wittman, Dan Edelstein, Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht, and Robert Pogue Harrison. I would also like to thank all the authors who have contributed to the physical and intellectual creation of this volume, the first results of which were presented at the American Association of Italian Studies meeting in Boulder, Colorado in March 2015, and at the American Association of Teachers of Italian meeting in Siena, in June of the same year. Without the encouragement of Robert Pogue Harrison, who witnessed the birth of this Ovidian project in a seminar on Italo Calvino at Stanford in the Spring of 2014, and that of Alessandro Barchiesi, this book would not have come to be. My deepest gratitude goes out to both of them. Finally, I would like to thank two people to whom this book is dedicated. They both believed in my intellectual capacities since the beginning of my academic career: Giulia del Giudice and Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht. Without them, my life would have taken a different path. 8 Titolo capitolo Contents

Alberto Comparini Italian Ovid. A Perspective on the Ever-Presence of Metamorphosis ...... 13

I Ovidian Philology

Sergio Casali Ovid and Italian Philology ...... 25 1 “Quellenforschung” in the Early Twentieth Century...... 26 2 Between the Two Wars ...... 31 3 The 1940s, the 1950s, and the Bimillenary Celebrations of 1957-1958 ...... 38 4 Ovid and the Self-Consciousness of Poetry ...... 45

II Ovid and the (Two) Italian Crowns

Francesca Irene Sensini “Referre idem aliter.” Vestiges of Ovid in Giovanni Pascoli’s Work...... 57 1 Introduction...... 57 2 Ovid in the Anthologies ...... 58 3 Ovid on the Bookshelves and in the Archives...... 62 4 Ovid Translated (and Metamorphosed) ...... 64 5 Ovid in the Backstory...... 71 6 Conclusion...... 75

Raffaella Bertazzoli “Nec species sua cuique manet.” D’Annunzio, Ovid, and the Re-Use of a Classic...... 79 1 The “Will to Sing” ...... 79 2 Other Myths (beyond Ovid) ...... 81 3 What Myth? ...... 82 4 The Metaphorical Muse...... 86 5 Between Myth and Vision...... 87 6 The Metamorphosis of the Self ...... 93 7 The Etiologic Myth and Beyond ...... 96 8 The Reuse of the Myth ...... 98

III Ovid and the Lyric, Part I

Massimo Colella “Tu che il non mutato amor mutata serbi.” Ovid and Montale...... 107 1 Introduction...... 107 2 Montale versus D’Annunzio. Different Models and Strategies of Metamorphosis ...... 110 3 Montalean Mythology: Annetta...... 118 4 Montalean Mythology: Clizia...... 123 10 Contents

IV Ovid between Modernism, Magism, and Surrealism

Alessandro Giammei Massimo Bontempelli’s Re-Inventions. Magism, Metaphysics, and Modern(ist) Mythology...... 129 1 Those Who Had “an Ovid” in the Novecento...... 130 2 Rescuing vs. Restoring Ovid, from Prussia to Valòria ...... 134 3 Taking Mythology Seriously, or How to Remake Ovid ...... 138

Lucilla Lijoi “Degno del canto di un Ovidio.” The ‘Metamorphoses’ as Key to Understanding Moder- nity in the Poetics of Alberto Savinio...... 143 1 Ovid as ‘persona agens’ ...... 143 2 Savinio’s Metamorphic Poetics...... 147

Laura Bardelli The Lure of the Apennines. The Myth of the Were-Goat in Tommaso Landolfi ...... 157 1 Introduction. Ovid, Landolfi, and the Apennines ...... 157 2 Goats’ Footsteps (Ovid, Landolfi, Pavese, Montale, Levi) ...... 158 3 The Village/Mountain Dichotomy and Pivotal Role of the Were-Animal ...... 165 4 A Poetic Initiation ...... 170

V Interdisciplinary Ovid

Rosalba Galvagno The Metamorphosis of Daphne in Carlo Levi ...... 177 1 The Portrait of Daphne in Verse...... 183 2 The Portrait of Daphne in Painting...... 190 3 The Prose Portrait of Daphne and Apollo...... 191

Bart van den Bossche Pavese’s Dialogue with Ovid. The Destiny of Metamorphosis in ‘Dialoghi con Leucò’ (1947) ...... 199 1 Pavese and Ovid...... 199 2 Tweaking the Motif of Metamorphosis ...... 202 3 Metamorphosis as a Hybrid Condition. The Story of Lycaon ...... 204 4 Lycaon and the Sovereign Ban...... 207 5 A New Order. Gods, Animals and Otherness...... 209 6 Conclusion...... 214

Vilma De Gasperin Protean Metamorphoses in Anna Maria Ortese...... 217 1 “Familienähnlichkeit.” Metamorphoses in Ortese and Ovid ...... 217 2 “Omnia mutantur, nihil interit” ...... 221 3 “Volucres animae.” Wings, Wind, Voice, and Poetic Imagination ...... 224 4 The Metamorphosing Gaze in ‘L’Iguana’ (1965) ...... 228 5 Decline, Fear, and Longing. Metamorphosis in ‘Il Cardillo addolorato’ (1993) ...... 233 Contents 11

VI Ovidian Rewrtings between Modernism and Postmodernism

Barbara Olla “L’arcano della favola splendida.” Gadda’s Re-writing of the Narcissus Myth...... 239 1 A Classical Heritage...... 239 2 Behind the Ovidian Symbolism: Gadda’s ‘Emilio e Narcisso’ ...... 242

Alberto Comparini Calvino, Ovid, and the ‘Metamorphoses.’ A Reading of ‘Le cosmicomiche’ (1965) .....257 1 Textual Inferences. Calvino, Reader of Ovid ...... 257 2 Postmodernist Mythologies. Calvino’s ‘Cosmicomiche’ ...... 267

Susanna Pietrosanti “Ariadneanly.” Secret Ovid in Antonio Tabucchi ...... 277 1 ‘Ars allusiva.’ Ovid, the Storyteller...... 277 2 The Metamorphosis after ‘The Metamorphoses:’ ‘Sogni di sogni’ ...... 281 3 ‘Letters mingle souls:’ the ‘Heroides’ ...... 285 4 “Ariadneanly.” Ovid, the Mythographer ...... 290 5 “Quoniam coniunx mea non potes esse, / arbor eris certe:” ‘Lettera da Casablanca’...293 6 “Since it is nature’s law to change, / constancy alone is strange:” Vertumnus...... 297 7 ‘La tessitura del labirinto.’ Ovidian roots in Antonio Tabucchi ...... 302

VII Ovid and the Lyric, Part II

Alessandro Fo Traces of Ovid. A Look at Recent Italian Poetry...... 307 1 In Search of a Face...... 307 2 “Metamorphoses Exist.” The Transformations of Myths ...... 312 3 “Inhabitant of Distance.” The Metamorphosis of Ovid in Exile...... 329 4 Digression and Conclusion...... 340

Index ...... 347 Bios and Abstracts...... 357 12 Contents Alberto Comparini

Italian Ovid. A Perspective on the Ever-Presence of Metamorphosis

In nova fert animus mutatas dicere formas corpora; di, coeptis (nam uos mutastis et illa), aspirate meis primaque ab origine mundi ad mea perpetuum deducite tempora carmen.

Ovid: Met., I, 1-4

To seek throughout the twentieth century the presence and, ça va sans dire, the absence of a figure as complex and fascinating as Ovid within the Novecento re- quires reflecting on the meaning and function that the ‘Classical Reception Stud- ies’ hold in the contemporary cultural discourse: “[By] reception,” write Lorna Hardwick and Christopher Stray in Companion to Classical Receptions (2011), “we mean the ways in which Greek and Roman material has been transmitted, translated, excerpted, interpreted, rewritten, re-imagined and represented.”1 The project, indeed, the initial inspiration, for Ovid’s Metamorphoses in Twentieth-Century Italian Literature departed from this principle: how and in what way has Ovid been received and transmitted in twentieth-century Italian literature? To pose a question of this type involves a series of historical and methodological considerations. Fortunately, Ovid studies offer some important instruments to anyone who might be interested in entering the thicket of Ovidian poetics, which can help to orient oneself and glimpse specific traditions of thought, not to mention the assistance they provide with the necessary overcoming – or simply going beyond – particular visions of the world that surround the Ovidian macrocosm. With respect to the reception of Ovid, the unsurpassed Ovid and the Moderns (2005)2 by Theodore Ziolkowski and the more recent A Hand-

1 Lorna Hardwick, Christopher Stray: Introductions. Making Connections, in: Compan- ion to Classical Receptions, Malden and Oxford 2011, p. 1. About it, see Anastasia Bakogianni: What is so ‘Classical’ about Classical Reception? Theories, Methodolo- gies and Future Prospects, in: Codex 4 1 (2016), pp. 96-113. Cf. also Charles Martin- dale: Reception. A New Humanism? Receptivity, Pedagogy, the Transhistorical, in: Classical Receptions Journal 5 2 (2013), pp. 169-183. 2 Theodore Ziolkowski: Ovid and the Moderns, Ithaca and London 2005. 14 Italian Ovid. A Perspective on the Ever-Presence of Metamorphosis book to the Reception of Ovid (2014)3 edited by John Miller and Carole New- lands offer two exceptional models and a fertile terrain on which start when studying the modalities of transmission to which Ovid has been subjected in na- tional literary traditions. So then, where exactly is Ovid situated in the Novecen- to? If we exclude certain singular cases, such as that of Ziolkowski, who manag- es to hunt out and include ‘foreign’ writers such as Italo Calvino and Antonio Tabucchi in the interpretive framework of Ovid and the Moderns, Ovidian scholars – both italianists and comparatists – have not been able to wrangle the power (both hermeneutical and structural)4 or the presence of Ovid’s work as pertinent to the course of Italian literary history. This shortcoming is inevitably connected to the centrality of Italian literature as pertains to Medieval and Renaissance studies, as well as to the supposed weakness of Italian literature within twentieth-century studies. It is indeed surprising, in this sense, to note the absence of an essay dedicated to a contemporary Italian author – or a historical genealogy of Ovid in Italy, like the one Ziolkowski traces in German literature5 – in the mis- cellaneous volume edited by Miller and Newlands or in the edition Transforma- tive Change in Western Thought. A History of Metamorphosis from Homer to Hollywood by Ingo Gildenhard and Andrew Zissos.6 This question would deserve to be further addressed in its historical, political, linguistic, and economic ramifications, but the publication of this book already seems to me an indicator of the (hidden) potential heralded by Italian literature

3 A Handbook to the Reception of Ovid, ed. by John Miller and Carole Newlands, Malden and Oxford 2014. 4 Alessandro Barchiesi has, as usual, brilliantly foreseen and pointed out Ovid’s role in the second half of twentieth century: “The striking revaluation of Ovid as a master in the second half of the twentieth century is inseparable from shifts in the theory and poetics of fiction – the rise of Queneau, Nabokov, Calvino, Eco, and Rushdie, the cri- sis of realism and naturalism, trends like postmodern poetics and magical realism” (Alessandro Barchiesi: Narrative Technique and Narratology in the ‘Metamorphoses,’ in: Cambridge Companion to Ovid, ed. by Philip Hardie, Cambridge 2002, p. 180). 5 Ziolkowski: Ovid in Germany, in: A Handbook to the Reception of Ovid, pp. 386-400. Studies dedicated to Ovid’s presence in (non-contemporary) Italian literature do exist, such as Bodo Guthmuller’s book: Ovidio Metamorphoseos Vulgare. Formen und Funktionen der volkssprachlichen Wiedergabe klassischer Dichtung in der italien- ischen Renaissance, Boppard 1981, or Robert Black’s brilliant essay: Ovid in Medie- val Italy, in: Ovid in the Middles Ages, ed. by James Clark, Frank Coulson, and Kathryn McKinley, Cambridge 2011, pp. 123-142. 6 Ingo Gildenhard, Andrew Zissos: Transformative Change in Western Thought. A His- tory of Metamorphosis from Homer to Hollywood, London 2013. Alberto Comparini 15 of the Novecento,7 of its interdisciplinary fabric and its capacity for entering into dialogue with other supranational literatures. The absence in question initially directed this book along a general horizon, dedicated to exploring the aesthetic, cultural, political, and sociological dynam- ics that had removed Ovid from the Italian literary system. That path would have further confirmed the theory that the Italian Novecento was the century of Virgil, as Laura Vallortigara recently demonstrated in her doctoral thesis – soon to be published – dedicated to the twentieth-century reception of the Aeneid and of Virgil in the Italian context.8 However, a more careful examination of the texts and literary history led to a different inflection for this project on Ovid. Even though Virgil’s historical- cultural primacy, especially thanks to the political instrumentalization of his work during the Fascist era (as well as the anti-fascist renewal of his work in the immediate postwar period)9 is beyond question, Ovid’s works are nonetheless translated, read, cited (directly or indirectly, according to the complex rules10 of Ovidian intertextuality),11 and rewritten by principal authors of the twentieth- century Italian canon. These treatments follow a diachronic trajectory from Gio- vanni Pascoli to Antonio Tabucchi – up to the contours of twenty-first-century Italian poetry –, coming to pivot on an aesthetic, that is, metamorphic reflection

7 See, for example Alberto Asor Rosa’s essay La storia del “romanzo italiano,” in: Il romanzo, ed. by Franco Moretti, Turin 2002, V, 3, pp. 255-306. 8 Laura Vallortigara: “L’epos impossibile.” Percorsi nella ricezione dell’‘Eneide’ nel Novecento, Ph.D. Dissertation, Ca’ Foscari University, a.y. 2016/2017. For a general consideration of the question, see Ziolkowski: Virgil and the Moderns, Princeton 1993. 9 With regards to this subject, Gabriele Pedullà’s introductory pages in Il libro di John- ny (2015) by Beppe Fenoglio are particularly important. As for the new edition of Partigiano Johnny, allow me to recommend my recent review that appeared in Studi Novecenteschi 95 2 (July-December 2016), pp. 520-528. 10 On this topic, see at least the following recent works: Intertextualité, interdiscursivité et intermédialité, ed. by Louis Hébert and Lucie Guillemette, Quebec 2009; Graham Allen: Intertextuality, New York and London 2011; Andrea Bernardelli: Che cos’è l’intertestualità, Rome 2013; Franke Berndt, Lily Tonger-Erk: Intertextualität. Eine Einfuhrung, Berlin 2013; Between Text and Text. The Hermeneutics of Intertextuality in Ancient Cultures and their Afterlife in Medieval and Modern Times, ed. by Michaela Bauks, Wayne Horowitz, and Armin Lange, Gottingen 2013; Intertextuality, ed. by Yelena Baraz and Christopher van den Berg, in: American Journal of Philology 134 1 (2013); Intertextualidades. Teoría y crítica en el arte y la literatura, ed. by Ly- dia Elizalde, Madrid 2014. 11 About intertextuality and the Ovidian world, see Sergio Casali’s important essay Ovidian Intertextuality, in: A Companion to Ovid, ed. by Peter Knox, Malden and Ox- ford 2009, pp. 341-354, now, translated onto Italian, in: Resistenza del classico, ed. by Roberto Andreotti, Milan 2009, pp. 196-215. 16 Italian Ovid. A Perspective on the Ever-Presence of Metamorphosis on art – or, in Calvino’s terms, a reflection around the “contiguità universale”12 of art. The contrast between the philological and interpretive solidity of Ovidian studies and the necessity of constructing the textual steps of the reception of Ov- id in twentieth-century Italy has required choices that will undoubtedly inspire disagreement. The first of these aspects pertains to methodology. Specifically, it concerns the relationship between the local and the universal; between the need to express the legitimate contingence of the objects of analysis and an idea of literature (and therefore of the world), the role of Cultural Studies and of ideological positions (from Postcolonial to Feminist Studies, from Gender to Posthuman Studies) in the study of literature.13 Furthermore, the need to find (or to look for, almost ob- stinately) a trans-historical correspondence between being and world brought us to an upheaval of the logical (or historical) development of thought, to the point that the purely local dimension of the literary text became almost liminal when inserted into more complex (or enlarged) systems. That being said, we by no means wish to undermine the importance of analysis directed towards the study of the universal statute of literary objects; the risk of losing sight of the centrality of authors or entire literary systems in the name of a more complex and universal vision of the world seemed to me too great a risk. As much as it might seem tempting to fully embrace the most recent Ovidi- an readings under the sign of phenomenology, such as Phänomenologie der Metamorphose Verwandlungen (2004)14 by Christian Zoll or La métamorphose dans les ‘Metamorphoses’ d´Ovide (2010)15 by Hélène Vial, it was decided that we would insert the ‘Ovidian’ authors into their respective literary microcosm (historical and philological), attempting to coax out the singular semantic and

12 Italo Calvino: Ovidio e la contiguità universale, in: Ovid: Metamorfosi, ed. by Piero Bernardini Marzolla, Turin 1979, pp. VII-XVI, then in: Perchè leggere i classici, Mi- lan 1991, pp. 36-49, and now in: Saggi 1945-1985, ed. by Mario Barenghi, Milan 1995, I, pp. 904-916. 13 Also, we in no way wish to undermine the importance of the use of the body and animals, for example, in Ovid’s poetics – an aspect that the reader will find in the contributions dedicated to Pavese and Ortese. The problem, rather, has to do with the uni- lateral application of world visions that are regulated by spatial-temporal and cultural models that differ from those of the Augustan age. The anachronism of the field of theory is relevant to the study of every text, and in itself guarantees an elastic vision of literature. The risk, as mentioned, is in using the literary text to more deeply ex- plore elements that regard only the theory, and that which pivots around it, transform- ing the analysis and the study of the literature into a purely teleological exercise. 14 Christian Zgoll: Phänomenologie der Metamorphose Verwandlungen und Verwandtes in der augsteischen Dichtung, Tübingen 2004. 15 Hélène Vial: La métamorphose dans les ‘Metamorphoses’ d’Ovide, Paris 2010. Alberto Comparini 17 formal style (in line with the “new formalist criticism” by Gildenhard and Zis- sos)16 with which these authors have read, taken up, and rewritten Ovid’s works. From here we encounter the second aspect: the primacy of the text, of close reading, and of the identification of Ovid’s presence/absence – not only in textual terms but also in terms of the history of ideas and of poetic thought – in the texts under consideration. If in fact, as mentioned at the beginning, the aesthetics of the reception aims to study the means by which the Greek and/or Roman tradition has been disseminated over the course of history, that must emerge from a systematic study and direct confrontation of the texts as inserted into a network of, first off, the thought and dialogue of the authors (Italian and Ovidian), and, secondarily, the criticism. The essays that make up Ovid’s Metamorphoses therefore take as their objec- tive to verify how Ovid has entered an author’s poetics and to study, on the aesthetic plane, the result of this Fearful Symmetry, as William Blake puts it, between Ovid and his readers. Studies of this kind, as Anastasia Bakogianni recently remarked, must be of a collective nature: “reception involves so many different perspectives that no single person can ever hope to master it all. That means that we must work together in order to produce research that maintains its integ- rity and is truly inclusive and cross-disciplinary.”17 Albeit united by a cultural substratum rooted in the study of classical culture (typical of the Italian tradition – and this goes for Ovidian authors, too), those having contributed to this book come from a diverse range of scientific sectors (italianists, comparatists, classicists) and find themselves in different phases of their respective carriers (doctoral students, postdoctoral researchers, high-school teachers, and university professors in Italy and abroad); that said, what makes this book homogeneous from a methodological point of view is precisely its his- torico-philological approach, which has allowed each contributor to move with conviction through the Italian and Ovidian semiotic forest – and, above all, to be able to outline a solid perimeter, thanks also to the measured use of intertextuality.

16 “the search for meaning in form, close attention to Ovid’s sophisticated handling of generic demarcations, and a heightened interest in how he accessed, assimilated, and altered the poetic modalities and semantic patterns of his literary sources” (Gilden- hard, Zissos: “Somatic Economies.” Tragic Bodies and Poetic Design in Ovid’s ‘Met- amorphoses,’ in: Ovidian Transformations. Essays on the Metamorphoses and its Re- ception, Cambridge 1999, p. 163, n. 4), “the movement […] revolutionized concep- tions of Ovid’s literary artistry by exploring his sophisticated handling of, above all, genre, allusion, and narrative technique […]. An episode can be laced with program- matic, intertextual, or generic gestures and still offer a meditation on human experi- ence” (Gildenhard, Zissos: Barbarian variations. Tereus, Procne and Philomela in Ovid (‘Met.’ 6.412-674) and Beyond, in: Dyctinna 4 (2007), p. 23). 17 Bakogianni: What is so ‘Classical’ about Classical Reception?, p. 103. 18 Italian Ovid. A Perspective on the Ever-Presence of Metamorphosis

In the absence of a study of this kind, it seemed to me impossible to proceed in any other way. In every field, research needs certain points of reference from which it can investigate further confines, especially in a discipline as osmotic and not entirely defined (nor definable in an unequivocal manner) as Classical Reception Studies. Such a need does not imply that this book might be exempt from criticism (methodological and/or content-wise); after all, history and philology, just like every other interpretive instrument, risk becoming ends rather than means. Furthermore, the presence of authors who take part in the western literary canon does not in and of itself guarantee the sensibleness of a hypothesis or the validity of a conclusion; in the end, the restricted field of study (funda- mentally literary) does not cover the entire (potential) presence of Ovid in contemporary Italian culture. That said, in the following pages the reader will find a history of Ovid, which, in concomitance with the bimillennial celebrations of the death of the Latin poet, yearns to chase down his aesthetic parabola, be it in forms of continuity or those of discontinuity. The perimeter that we sought to reconstruct pivots around the lyrics and the theory of the lyrics at the beginning of the Novecento; the relationships between publishing and philology, read across the evolution of the concept of ‘classical culture’ in the age that precedes and follows the divide of Fascism; the modernist aesthetics and its structural deviations, such as magismo and surrealismo; the metamorphic and interdisciplinary character of twentieth-century art; the transi- tion from modernism to postmodernism in the setting of the rewriting of Ovidian myths. A chapter has been devoted to each of these aspects, but the reader can easily verify how Ovid presents no pauses of any kind but rather returns, without interruption and in different forms, throughout twentieth-century Italian history. This history has a double form, editorial and academic, still rooted in the negative judgment of Vorlesungen über Ästhetik (1821-1826) by Hegel, which will find its end (in part) only after the fall of Fascism (and therefore in the cult of Virgil); Sergio Casali recounts this transpiring of events brilliantly, recognizing two fundamental moments in the rebirth of Ovid: the bimillennial of his birth (1957) and, especially, the publication of Memoria dei poeti e sistema letterario (1974)18 by Gian Biagio Conte, at which point Ovid recovers his role as ‘poet’ alongside Catullus, Virgil, and Lucan. This crucial contribution is thus situated directly at the margins of the text and is dedicated to offer to its readers the diachronic stops along the way of the editorial history of Ovid, whose trajectory must be read in parallel with the rewritings, readings, and interpretations at the hands of twentieth-century Italian poets and prose writers. The twentieth-century cultural history of Ovid opens with two important figures that mark the shift from the nineteenth century and the twentieth: Giovanni

18 Gian Biagio Conte: Memoria dei poeti e sistema letterario. Catullo, Virgilio, Ovidio, Lucano, Turin 1974. Alberto Comparini 19

Pascoli (1855-1912) and Gabriele d’Annunzio (1863-1938). Respectively, Fran- cesca Irene Sensini and Raffaella Bertazzoli reveal two forms of Ovid: one that is profoundly philological, rooted on the anthological (and academic, in Pascoli’s case) study and in the practice of translation, which Sensini analyzes through a careful study of the sources and archive of the poet from San Mauro di Romagna to show the lyrical and existential continuity that ties him to the Ovid of the Fas- ti and the Metamorphoses; the other, more inclined to a comparative reading of D’Annunzio, Pascoli, and Ovid according to the concept of critique et verité by Roland Barthes (1966), with reference to D’Annunzio’s Alcyone (1904) and the Metamorphoses. Both essays, by means of a compact intertextual confrontation with the Metamorphoses, unpack the way that lyricism, on the one hand, and the structure of the ‘book of poetry’ (or the lyrical macrotext),19 on the other, are profoundly affected by the Ovidian poetic code, whose inherent metamorphic structure offered Pascoli and D’Annunzio not only the linguistic and thematic material for their works, but also a poetic model capable of breaking with the Romantic tradition and generating a new type of poetry. As regards this last component, Massimo Colella philologically and intertex- tually describes the existence of an ‘Ovid-function’ in the poetry of Eugenio Montale (1896-1981) – a function that goes beyond the simple reprisal of lexicon or mythological figures. Due to the Genoese poet’s (presumed) scarce classical instruction, this function had not been adequately studied until now, or has been relegated to a (para)textual structure used by Montale in the construction of his books of poetry.20 Clizia, in fact, is not only a lexical voice that appears in Mon- tale’s (lyrical and narrative) corpus, but also a ‘mythologem,’ which has its roots in Ovid’s Metamorphoses. After having identified the sources and conducted an intertextual examination of the Ovidian elements that reappear in Montale, Colella demonstrates beyond a shadow of a doubt how, behind the mythography that Montale had knowingly constructed since Ossi di seppia (1925), there lies the metamorphic-hermeneutic power of Ovid’s poetry. Regarding the two, there is no direct philological rapport, but rather a real appropriation (lyrical and poetic) of a system of characters (to which one must add also Daphne and Eurydice), through which Montale found his own (modernist) personal mythology.

19 See Enrico Testa: Il libro di poesia. Tipologie e analisi macrotestuali, Genoa 1983; Testa: Alcuni appunti per una descrizione del macrotesto poetico, in: Linguistica te- stuale, Conference Proceedings (Genoa-Santa Margherita, 8-10 May 1981), ed. by Lorenzo Coveri, Rome 1984, pp. 139-148; Poems in their Place. Intertextuality and Order of Poetic Collections, ed. by Neil Fraistat, Chapel Hill 1987; Testa: L’esigenza del libro, in: La poesia del Novecento. Modi e Tecniche, Conference Proceedings (Ve- nice, 13-15 April 2000), ed. by Marco Antonio Bazzocchi and Fausto Curi, Bologna 2003, pp. 97-119. 20 Cf. Niccolò Scaffai: Montale e il libro di poesia. ‘Ossi di seppia,’ ‘Le occasioni,’ ‘La bufera e altro,’ Pisa 2002. 20 Italian Ovid. A Perspective on the Ever-Presence of Metamorphosis

After this initial lyrical parenthesis, the essays in the fourth section focus mostly on the connection between Ovid and the poetics of modernism, of the magismo and surrealismo in the prose work of Massimo Bontempelli (1878-1960), Alber- to Savinio (1891-1952), and Tommaso Landolfi (1908-1979). In Italy, these aesthetic-historiographic labels are continuously subjected to changes and regularly misunderstood by scholars and readers alike; Ovid, in this case, becomes the bearer of a metamorphic, or elastic, poetics, one that the respective authors (Alessandro Giammei, Lucilla Lijoi, Laura Bardelli) read as modernist in their examined instances. With regards to the preceding contributions, a greater deal of attention is granted to the aesthetic development of the poetics, and not to the intertextual relationships or lexical reprisals (be they images, characters, or themes): for Bontempelli, Savinio, and Landolfi, Ovid’s poetics breaks the limits imposed by contemporary aesthetics and brings to art (both literary and figura- tive) a new light capable of de-forming reality (fictional and not) and generating new forms of knowing the world. In the fifth section, Rosalba Galvagno, Bart van den Bossche, and Vilma De Gasperin study the metamorphic function in Carlo Levi (1902-1975), Cesare Pa- vese (1908-1950), and Anna Maria Ortese (1914-1988). The natural element, of which the animals are a vital and biological expression that falls at the center of Levi’s, Pavese’s and Ortese’s poetics, is subjected to an intertextual examination alongside Ovid’s Metamorphoses. By means of a direct comparison between sources and rewritings, the authors identify a method of fantasy writing tied, on the one hand, to a process of nature mythography (Levi and Pavese), and, on the other, to experiments with narrative characters that aim to find a new form for the author’s voice (Ortese), a new body with which to express the world on the narrative plane of life. The sixth section is dedicated to Ovid’s aesthetic parabola between the first and second halves of the Novecento – simply, between modernism and postmod- ernism21 –, focusing on the restructuring of certain myths, such as that of Narcis- sus in Carlo Emilio Gadda (1893-1973), or on narrative structures, as in Cos- micomiche (1965) by Italo Calvino (1923-1985), or, again, in Antonio Tabuc- chi’s (1943-2012) complex system of citations and metanarratives. What ties these authors together in their rewritings of the Ovidian work (in this case, the Metamorphoses) is undoubtedly the metanarrative structure of the works, as well as a profoundly structural vision of the myth. In this way the myth, although originally endowed with a hermeneutical value, as the examples collected in this book can testify, slowly loses its capacity to pass down meaning and to singular-

21 On the rewritings of the myth between modernism and postmodernism, allow me to refer to my essay (and to the respective bibliography): Una proposta per il moder- nismo italiano. La mitologia esistenziale modernista, in: Rassegna Europea di Lette- ratura italiana 41 1 (January-June 2013), pp. 103-123. Alberto Comparini 21 ly give sense to the world (Gadda), becoming a ‘simple’ mythos, a story, which Calvino and Tabucchi use to write, or rather, to generate new myths, new stories. The essay that closes the book is dedicated to a study of Ovidian textures in the poetry of the latter half of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty-first. Alessandro Fo, himself a poet and one of the most important living Latinists, demonstrates how Ovid’s work crosses whole poetics and different historical periods, even at an inernational level, with examples taken from Brodsky, Gelman, Hardy, and Mandelstam, for example. In the lyric, the Ovid-function demonstrates anew all its power of metamorphosis, coming indifferently to cover a role that is first poetic, then intertextual. The ‘Ovid-function’ shows once again all its metamorphic power, stepping in, again indifferently, to fill a poetic role here, an intertextual one there, starting, as Francesca Irene Sensini and Raffaella Bertazzoli show, with the reprisal of Ovidian texts by Giovanni Pascoli and Ga- briele d’Annunzio.

Despite the shadow of Virgil looming over Ovidian reception, Ovidian texts never cease to be read, translated, interpreted, and rewritten during the course of the Novecento. The Italian case, isolated here in all its singularity, shows how Ovid is not only “the man as the exemplary exile; the poet as the advocate of words over things; and the Metamorphoses as the fitting symbol of change.”22 Certainly, the Italian Ovid reenters in these three aspects ‘discovered’ by Ziol- kowski, but, secularly speaking, he also transcends them, finding new aesthetic- symbolic forms capable of expressing a new Zeitgeist. Although his fortune is strongly linked to the Metamorphoses, there is no lack of occasional – and certainly not casual – references to Amores, Ars amatoria, Fasti, Tristia or the Epistulae. While maintaining a strong intertextual presence, Ovid (re)appears continually in different forms, which the Italian poets and narrators use to define, circumscribe, or even denounce the limits of current poetics. Ovid, in this sense, does not represent a mere exercise in intertextuality: he, as opposed to other Latin authors – from Virgil to Catullus, across Propertius and Tibullus –, becomes icon of the fluidity of art, of its hermeneutic and structural power, able to bring to the world of fiction and reality not only new possi- bilities, but, above all, a new desire to know.

Verona, November 2017

22 Ziolkowski: Ovid and the Moderns, p. 223. 22 Italian Ovid. A Perspective on the Ever-Presence of Metamorphosis I Ovidian Philology 24 Ovid and Italian Philology Sergio Casali 25

Sergio Casali

Ovid and Italian Philology

At the end of the nineteenth century Ovid was considered little more than a frivolous, facile, and immoral minor poet. In Italy he was regarded, at best, as a suitable tool for students to learn Latin, or as a textbook in mythology, but hardly worthy of proper scholarly attention.1 As Scevola Mariotti asserted in his 1957 seminal article, the nineteenth century negative judgment of the Romantics about Ovid – “il poeta che aveva ripreso senza originalità la genuina mitologia greca e l’aveva trasmessa al classicismo di tutti i tempi, […] l’allievo dei retori, […] l’uomo che, anche perseguitato, non aveva rinunciato all’adulazione”2 – remai- ned valid for a large part of the twentieth century.3 Still in 1987 Stephen Hinds

1 I would like to thank Alberto Comparini for his patience and helpfulness, and also Alessandra Rossi of the University of Rome “Tor Vergata” for assistance in finding various bibliographical items. I also thank my friend Luigi Galasso with whom I have fruitfully discussed many of the issues treated in this chapter. 2 Scevola Mariotti: La carriera poetica di Ovidio, in: Belfagor 12 (1957), p. 609. 3 The obscuring of Ovid in the nineteenth century was noticed by scholars already at least in the 1920s (cf. e.g. Raymond Huntington Coon: The Vogue of Ovid since the Renaissance, in: The Classical Journal 25 (1930), p. 288: “The nineteenth century is the dark age, in which the spirit of our poet is banished”), probably even earlier, and it is a rhetorical move already widespread in the studies of this period that of referring to the present age as a possible, and desirable, ‘Ovidian age.’ In 1921, for example, Émile Ripert closes his book on Ovid (Ovide. Poète de l’amour, des dieux et de l’exile, Paris 1921) with the following wish: “Que ce respect des nouvaux Barbares [sc. the Rumanians and the Germans mentioned before, who honor Ovid] soit por la gloire d’Ovide le début d’une ère nouvelle” (p. 283, but all the final paragraphs of the book are to be read, pp. 283-284). In 1930, in the US, Coon was wondering if by chance we are “witnessing an Ovidian renaissance” (The Vogue of Ovid, pp. 288- 290); and, after having considered the present scholarly production about Ovid (for example, Arthur Palmer’s commentary on the Heroides, S.G. Owen’s edition of the exile poetry, both mentioned below, and, more strangely, some pages on Ovid in Gil- bert Murray: Essays and Addresses, London 1921, pp. 115-117), he concludes that “the present generation has not completely ‘turned its blind spot toward Ovid,’ or rather that it is beginning to alter the direction of its vision” (p. 189). In any case, the reading of Ripert’s book on Ovid convinces him that, at least as far as regards France, “the spirit of Ovid, never dead, is flowering again, and that we may perhaps anticipate another aetas Ovidiana.” In fact, for a proper new ‘Ovidian age’ we have to wait until the Ovidian renaissance of the middle 1980s, as we shall see. Until then, Ovid contin- 26 Ovid and Italian Philology proposed to counteract three commonplaces about Ovid: (1) that he is a superfi- cial and overly explicit poet, (2) that he is excessively literary, and (3) that he is a passive panegyrist.4 The history of Ovidian criticism in Italy (but not only in Italy) in the course of the twentieth century is the history of overcoming these three prejudices.

1. “Quellenforschung” in the Early Twentieth Century

At the beginning of the twentieth century Luigi Castiglioni (1882-1965) was studying at the Scuola Normale Superiore of Pisa, where he earned his degree in 1904 with a dissertation on the Greek sources of Ovid’s Metamorphoses, which will be published two years later as Studi intorno alle fonti e alla composizione delle ‘Metamorfosi’ di Ovidio (1906).5 But even before the publication of this book, he had already published an article on Ovid’s Heroides (1903).6 Following the respectable Macmillan school edition (1879),7 the Heroides had been edited and published with a commentary by Arthur Palmer in 1898, but it seems the young Castiglioni was not aware of these works, just as he also ignored the 1896

ues to be ‘judged,’ positively or negatively; it is rare to find a book on Ovid prior to the 1980s which does not begin with an official declaration that it is time to revaluate Ovid as a poet, and maybe as a great poet (starting at least with Ripert: “je serais heu- reux si ces quelques pages pouvaient marquer pour lui l’instant d’une réhabilitation souhaitable,” in: Ovide, p. XI). As matter of fact, around the middle of the century, the scholars of Ovid seem to have opened their eyes: Thomas Wright: The Augustan Poets, in: Fifty Years of Classical Scholarship, ed. by Maurice Platnauer, Oxford 1954, p. 331: “The comparative poverty of scholarly works on Ovid, despite the great bulk of his writings, is eloquent testimony to the general neglect into which he has fallen in the twentieth century;” and Lancelot Patrick Wilkinson begins his Ovid Re- called, Cambridge 1955, with the assertion that “comparatively little has been written about Ovid lately” (p. IX). 4 Stephen Hinds: Generalising about Ovid, in: Ramus 16 1-2 (1987), pp. 4-31, now reprinted in: Oxford Readings in Ovid, ed. by Peter Knox, Oxford 2006, pp. 15-50. 5 Luigi Castiglioni: Studi intorno alle fonti e alla composizione delle ‘Metamorfosi’ di Ovidio, Pisa 1906. On Castiglioni’s life and works see at least the following works: Antonio La Penna: Luigi Castiglioni, in: Belfagor 17 (1962), pp. 42-68, then reprinted in: I critici. Storia monografica della filologia e della critica moderna in Italia, ed. by Gianni Grana, Milan 1969, IV, pp. 2525-2543; Ignazio Cazzaniga: Luigi Castiglioni, in: Gnomon 38 1 (March 1966), pp. 106-108; Alberto Grilli: Castiglioni, Luigi, in: Di- zionario Biografico degli Italiani 22 (1979), pp. 169-171. 6 Castiglioni: Intorno alle ‘Eroidi’ di Ovidio, in: Atene e Roma 6 56 (August 1903), pp. 239-249. 7 P. Ovidii Nasonis Epistulae Heroidum XIII [1879], ed. by Shuckburgh, London 1885.2 Sergio Casali 27

Johns Hopkins dissertation by James Nesbitt Anderson. In fact, in his notes he characteristically only refers to German scholars. Two of them, Karl Dilthey (1839-1907) and Georg Knaack (1857-1905), appear to have been directly con- tacted by Castiglioni, who thanks the former for having sent him a copy of Dilthey 1884-1885,8 and the second for having shown him Knaack’s Handexam- plar from 1880.9 First of all, Castiglioni considers the issue of Ovid’s originality in composing the collection of the Heroides: it is already typical of what will be his critical approach to Ovid that he inclines to agree with Dilthey in thinking that, after all, the poet must have had some Alexandrian predecessors; Ovid’s claim of originality for the plan of the Heroides10 would be justified by the fact that he had been the first to move an already existent genre of poetic love letters from Greece to Rome, perhaps implying that no such collection of verse epistles exist- ed before him. As to the letter of Arethusa to Lycotas (IV, 3), it is uncertain who precedes whom, but probably both Ovid and Propertius were drawing on a common Alexandrian source. Even if Castiglioni’s approach is evidently in- spired by the German Quellenforschung of the end of the nineteenth and the early twentieth century, his view of Ovid’s practice of imitation is neither rigid nor reductive:

Egli, dice il Dilthey, partito dagli esempi del genere epistolare greco, volse e fuse insieme a vantaggio dell’opera sua la tragedia antica, l’elegia alessandrina e la re- torica greco-romana. Nulla di più vero! Ricercare una fonte unica per ogni opera del poeta sulmonese è, per me, opera vana: nessuno meglio di lui ha saputo fonde- re, contaminare, come si dice, le diverse narrazioni, adattando alle une particolari e pensieri tratti da altri luoghi: imitando, insomma, originalmente. Lo sviluppo della favola sta nelle mani dell’artista e dalle qualità sue assimilatrici prende for- me e colori; solo il nucleo conserva i caratteri primi dell’origine sua.11

So, notwithstanding his declaration of faith in the existence of an Alexandrian genre of poetic epistles, Castiglioni devotes the rest of his article to a consideration of the epic, tragic, and Alexandrian ‘sources’ of some of Ovid’s Heroides. There is hardly anything new in this cursory discussion; Castiglioni relies on Birt for the parallels between Euripides’ Medea and Her. XII (but Birt does not mention the influence of Apollonius), and for those between the Second Hippolytus and Her. IV, including the view according to which Ovid made use also of Eu-

8 Karl Dilthey: Observationum in epistulas heroidum Ovidianas particula I, Göttingen 1884-1885. 9 Georgius Knaack: Analecta Alexandrino-Romana, Greifswald 1880. 10 Ovid: Ars am., III, 345-346. 11 Castiglioni: Intorno alle ‘Eroidi’ di Ovidio, pp. 242-243. 28 Ovid and Italian Philology ripides’ lost First Hippolytus;12 on Knaack for the possible connection between the treatment of Phyllis in Her. II and that in Callimachus.13 Impressive in this article is the fact that Castiglioni appears to be completely free of negative prejudices in his evaluation of one of the least appreciated of Ovid’s works; in fact, he abstains from any reductive assessment of Ovid’s art of imitation in the Heroides, and as to the notorious theme of the influence of Roman rhetoric on them, he limits himself to the cursory hint in the passage quoted above. Castiglioni’s Studi intorno alle fonti e alla composizione delle ‘Metamorfosi’ di Ovidio is pure late eighteenth/early twentieth century Quellenforschung.14 In the same years, other studies similarly devoted to the study of the sources of Ov- id’s major poem came out in France (1904)15 and in Germany (1905).16 The book is divided in three parts. In the first part, Castiglioni analyzes Ovid’s descriptions of the moment of the metamorphosis, and classifies them in various groups, studying the modifications, the developments, and the combinations that the metamorphosis legends experienced before they assumed a literary form, taking into consideration the influence of scholars and mythographers. In the second part, he examines various groups of tales from the poem: the ‘unwilling hunt- resses:’ Apollo and Daphne; the boys loved by gods: Cyparissus and Apollo, Ampelus and Bacchus, Hyacinthus and Apollo, and so on. In the third part, Castiglioni studies the composition and narrative techniques of Greek catalogue poetry, giving special consideration to the lost Heteroioumena of the Hellenistic poet Nicander, of whose work we have only the prose summaries ascribed to him

12 Theodor Birt: Animadversiones ad Ovidi Heroidum epistulas, in: Rheinisches Muse- um für Philologie 32 (1877), respectively at pp. 401-403 and 403-406. 13 Knaack: Analecta Alexandrino-Romana, pp. 29-48. Nevertheless, Castiglioni’s article is listed in the Heroides bibliography of Schanz-Hosius: Martin Schanz, Carl Hosius: Geschichte der römischen Literatur bis zum Gesetzgebungswerk des Kaisers Justini- an, II, Die römische Literatur in der Zeit der Monarchie bis auf Hadrian, fourth new edition by Carl Hosius, Munich 1935, p. 215 (admittedly, not a very significant fact in itself, teste Castiglioni himself: in Schanz’s bibliographies on Ovid, “accanto a scritti pregevoli, sono alla rinfusa prodotti i titoli di lavori insignificanti o del tutto inutili,” Castiglioni: Ovidio Nasone, Publio, in: Enciclopedia Italiana 25 (1935), p. 829), and still cited, e.g., in the Phaedra chapter of Howard Jacobson: Ovid’s ‘Heroides,’ Princeton 1974, pp. 142-158. 14 For useful surveys of the practice of Quellenforschung in this period, see Gian Franco Pasini: Dossier sulla critica delle fonti (1896-1909), Bologna 1988, and Glenn Warren Most: The Rise and Fall of ‘Quellenforschung,’ in: For the Sake of Learning. Essays in Honor of Anthony Grafton, ed. by Ann Blair and Anja-Silvia Goeing, Leiden 2016, II, pp. 933-954. 15 Georges Lafaye: Les ‘Métamorphoses’ d’Ovide et leurs modèles grecs, Paris 1904. 16 Johannes Dietze: Komposition und Quellenbenutzung in Ovids Metamorphosen, Hamburg 1905. Sergio Casali 29 by a second- or third-century AD mythographer, Antoninus Liberalis (plus a four-lines fragment on the metamorphosis of Hecuba quoted by a scholiast on Euripides). In a rather paternalistic review, Concetto Marchesi, while recognizing the value of Castiglioni’s book, also highlights some of its defects, mainly the lack of organization, the prolixity of the style, and the absence of conclusions: the book is “uno zibaldone ricchissimo di appunti,” that would have benefitted from a considerable reduction in size.17 An important aspect of his work on Ovid, however, will receive careful attention many years later from La Penna: Castiglioni’s book, “se paragonato a ricerche e a giudizi anteriori o contempora- nei, è una rivalutazione del genio ovidiano.”18 In Castiglioni’s view, Ovid does not string together a series of Hellenistic epyllia; he is able to develop, according to his culture and his genius, even embryonic hints contained in his models; he contaminates different sources, and, even if perhaps all the transitions from one story to another go back to Hellenistic or Hesiodic techniques, he is able to mod- ify his source material with originality. For it stands that, since the very beginning of his book, Castiglioni emphasizes the unity of Ovid’s art, in its various works and genres, stressing how there is a continuity from Ovid’s amatory works, already influenced by Hellenistic poetry and Roman elegy, to his Meta- morphoses.19 Also, the fact that Castiglioni sets limits to the then widespread idea of an Ovid accustomed to using mythographic manuals instead of poetic sources is indicative of a revaluation of Ovid’s culture and personality.20 In the following years21 Castiglioni will return to Ovid only from a strictly philological point of view, with the notable exception of the ‘Ovidio’ entry in the

17 Concetto Marchesi: review to Luigi Castiglioni’s Studi intorno alle fonti e alla composizione delle ‘Metamorfosi’ di Ovidio, Pisa 1906, in: Rivista di Filologia e di Istru- zione Classica 35 (1907), p. 377. 18 La Penna: Luigi Castiglioni, p. 2528. For example, see Carlo Pascal: Alcune osserva- zioni sopra l’arte ovidiana nelle ‘Metamorfosi,’ in: Atene e Roma 11 118-119 (Octo- ber-November 1908), pp. 346-357, whose patronizing ‘observations on Ovid’s art in the Metamorphoses’ consist basically in a list of Ovid’s ‘mistakes’ and stylistic incon- veniencies. 19 Castiglioni: Studi intorno alle fonti e alla composizione delle ‘Metamorfosi’ di Ovidio, pp. 4-5. 20 La Penna: Luigi Castiglioni, pp. 2528-2529. 21 Castiglioni: I codici Ambrosiani e la recensione critica dei ‘Fasti’ di Ovidio, in: Ren- diconti dell’Istituto Lombardo, Classe di lettere, scienze morali e storiche 60 (1927), pp. 409-427; Castiglioni: Storia del testo dei ‘Fasti’ di Ovidio, in: Rivista di Filologia e di Istruzione Classica 67 17 (1939), pp. 319-341. Cf. also his revisions of Carlo Landi’s edition of the Fasti (Turin 1928) in the ‘Corpus Paravianum’ (Turin 1960).