Upload
zostrian
View
246
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/9/2019 Betensky Lucretius and Love Classical World
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/betensky-lucretius-and-love-classical-world 1/10
8/9/2019 Betensky Lucretius and Love Classical World
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/betensky-lucretius-and-love-classical-world 2/10
LUCRETIUS
AND
LOVE
Fewreaders
till elieve
he
myth
hat
ucretius ent
mad nddied
f
love.'
But he
mage
f love-crazed
oet
haranguinggainstovehas n-
fluenced any eaders'
mpressions
f the nd of De Rerum
Natura
,
despite
he
distinction
owobserved etween
ersona
nd
personality,2
and
despite
ur
knowledge
hatwhetherr not
Lucretius escribed is
own
xperiences,
edrew n traditionalources hich e
can
pinpoint.3
The
end
fDe Rerum
atura is most ften till ead
n
ccordance
ith
the
tereotype
f
Lucretiuss an anti-love
oet,4
hen
n
facthe
ap-
proves f ove.The ntentf
this aper sto demonstrate
hat ucretius
acknowledges
wo
facets f
ove,
ach
centeredn the
figure
f
Venus,
with omplexonnectionso each other.One facetmaybe termedhe
happy deal,
he ther hebleakreality;nd
the
poetwears t one time
the ersona
f
dealistnd
t
anotherhe ersona f
realistndeven es-
simist,lways ware
fthe apbetweenhe
wo nd ryingo find reso-
lution.
Let us beginwith
ucretius' enus n De Rerum
atura . He intro-
duces
her s
physiologicallys
possible,
moving rom discussion
f
1
St.
Jerome
eportedhat
ucretius entmad nd
killed imself
nder he
nfluencef
a love
potion.
he
question
f
the
oet's
ersonality
as
njected
tselfnto
nalysis
f
his
poem ver ince. speciallynfluentialavebeenM. Patin'snotionf I'antilucrecehez
Lucrece, nEtudes ur
a
poesie atine
Paris
1883)
nd
Otto
Regenbogen,
Lukrez:
eine
Gestalt n seinem
Gedicht,
Neue
Wege
zur
Antike
2
(1932), repr.
n
Kleine
Schriften
(Mtlnchen
961)
296-386,
ollowed
y
Marc
Rozelaar,
ukrez,
Versuch
iner
eutung
(Amsterdam
943).
ome
recent
riterstill
ubscribeo this
myth,
mong
hem
. P.
Wisemann his
fascinatingry t
biography,The
Two Worlds
f Titus
Lucretius,
n
Cinna
the
Poet and Other
Roman
Essays Leicester
974)11-43.
But
more
ften
ritics
owreject he
myth. .
Ziegler,
Der Tod des
Lucretius,
Hermes 1
1936)
21-40,
hows
ts
uspectharacter.. P.
Wilkinson,Lucretiusndthe
Love-Philtre,
R
63
1949)
7-48,makes
good
ase
hat erome
rhis
ource
uetonius
misread
Lucretius
or
ucullus, hodid
dieof a love
potion,
ccordingo
Nepos
nd
Pliny.
. E.
W.
Wormell,
Lucretius:
he
Personalityfthe
oet, G&R
7
(1960)
4-65,
rejectshe
vidence
or
nsanity.
. E.
Kinsey,The
Melancholy
f
Lucretius,
rion
(1964)115-30,ndEdwardM. Bradley,Lucretiusndthe rrational, J67 1972) 17-
22,
rgue
hat
melancholy,
pessimism,
nd
irrationality
re matter
f he
oem's
intentional
hetoric
ather
han f
personality.
n
the
ntroductionohis
ecent
ranslation,
Lucretius:
On the
Natureof
Things New York
1974), Palmer
Bovie does
not even
mention
the
myth.
2
See
Archibald
llen,
'Sincerity'
nd he
Roman
legists, P45
(1950) 45-60.
3
See
Godo
Lieberg,
uella
Divina
Amsterdam
962)
284-300,nd
E. J.
Kenney,
Doctus
Lucretius,
nem.
3 1970)
66-92.
4
For
various iews f
Book
4
as
someform
f
attack n
love,
ee:John .
Stearns,
Epicurusnd
Lucretiusn
Love, CJ31
1936) 43-51
the
iolencef
Lucretius'
attack
on ove s
quite
n-Epicurean,.
349);
he
ommentariesf
Leonard
nd
Smith
Madi-
son
1942) nd
Cyril
aileyOxford
947);
H.
St.H.
Vertue,
Venus
nd
Lucretius,
&R
3
(1956)140-52
Between
heVenus
f
Book and
the
Venus fBook
v
theres a
com-
plete iscrepancy, . 150);W. S. Anderson,DiscontinuitynLucretianymbolism,
TAPA
91
1960)1-29
as the
oem
rogressesenus
swell
s
other
ymbols
eteriorates
and becomes
ostile o
mankind);
enney,bove,
note3;
andmost
ecently
aneM.
Snyder,
Lucretius
nd
he
tatus f
Women,
B
53
1976)
7-19.
291
This content downloaded from 129.67.63.107 on Sun, 25 May 2014 18:36:10 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/9/2019 Betensky Lucretius and Love Classical World
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/betensky-lucretius-and-love-classical-world 3/10
292
AYA BETENSKY
dreams
o
wet reamsnd
then othemechanicsfejaculation, hich e
showsmockinglyobethebody's nactmentf the omanticxpression
''woundof ove : semens equatedwith lood purting
utofa wound
(4. 1049-1056).' he
physiologicalection nds with he ine namque
voluptatemraesagitmuta upido for n unspoken
esire oretellshe
pleasure o come, 4.
1057).And new aragraphn the sychologyf
love s inked
o
the
revious aragraph ith heseines:
Haec Venus st
nobis;hinc utemst omen
moris,
hinc llaec rimum eneris ulcedinisncor
stillavitutta t uccessit
rigida
ura.
4. 1058-1060)
Asis typicalfLucretius'ogic, hisntroductiono his hemesalsothe
conclusiono
be
proven.
t
is
a
punning
eductionf the
mythology
f
Venus o physiology.t s also an emphatictatement:his s
ourVenus,
this
s how
we
Romans
now
her,
nd this s
how
he functions
or
s,
devoid
f
personality
r
divinity,ausing nly
waste nd
destruction.
These ines efer
oignantly
o
a
choral de on love
n
Euripides' ip-
polytUs.6
And
the ragedyf
overemains
n
the
escription
hat
ollows,
but
t
s
based
ntirelyn
humanack
f
elf-control.henVenus
s
per-
sonified ere he s
not
goddess
ut
whore
r
a
mere
bject
f sexual
desire
volgivaga Venere,
071;
Veneres
ostras,1185).
Otherwise
he
s
equivalent
o
voluptas,
which s reduced
o
meaning
ex
tself,'
s
not
al-
ways leasurable,ndhas ittleodo with picureandeals.
Using
he
ragicerminology
hat erives rom reek
yric
ndHellen-
istic oetry,
ucretius rites
ffuror 1069, 1117),
olor
1067),
rdor
(1077),
miser
1076,
1096),
anus/insanus
1075),
ulcus
1068),
vulnus
(1070), epos 1133), nd deliciae
1156).
He
is
trying
o heal
hemind's
wounds1048), ut
he
applies his erminologyhysicallys
he describes
writhingouples
who
bite
nd
hurt ach
other
n
their
renzied
fforts
t
total
possession1079-1083, 101-1104).
he Lucretian
over,
bsorbed
in
perfumesnd flowers,
isregardsfficia
nd
ama 1124)
nd tries o
ignore
he
knowledge
hat
his fountain
f
pleasures
s bitter
1133).
Lucretiusims omeof hismost arcasticines t theblindnesshat l-
lows
the over o
idealize
his
mperfect
istress
yconcealing
he
ugly
physical eality
nder
uphemisticet
names
1153-1170).8
e
is in-
terested
nly
n
hitting
hemost bvious
argets
ere.
This
paragraph
limaxes
with
n
imaginary
vocation
f
the mells
whichwouldmake he hut-out
over lee
gain
f
he
were ver dmitted
to his mistress' oor.9
But
Lucretius emoves
he
ting
nd
closes
he
paragraph
o
gently
hat he hift
may
be overlooked.
nce the over
realizes
he
ruth,
hat
o mortal oman
an
have uch
ivine ttributes
s For
a
good discussion
ee
Kenney note
3) p. 381.
6
Alleditors ote his eference, hichKenney iscussesnote 3) pp. 384-85.
7
1057,
1075, 1085,
1114, 1201, 1208,
1263.
8
See
Lieberg note 3) pp.
284-300 for a thorough nalysis
of
Lucretius'
Hellenistic
sources.
9
For possibleLucretian
nfluence,ee Juvenal ,
Pope's Rape of the Lock, and
the
close-up f theBrobdingnagian
omen nSwift'sGulliver's
Travels.
This content downloaded from 129.67.63.107 on Sun, 25 May 2014 18:36:10 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/9/2019 Betensky Lucretius and Love Classical World
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/betensky-lucretius-and-love-classical-world 4/10
LUCRETIUS
ND
LOVE
293
(1184),
he
may
be
ready
to
forgive
er
defects,
i
bello
nimost
t
non
odiosa
1190), if she has a fairmind nd isnothateful. The important
thing s to shake
offone's
own
blindness
cupidine
aeci,
1153),
discover
the
truth bout
thewoman,
and
bring
t
out
into the
open (omnia
.
.
protraheren
lucem,
1188-1189).
n the ight f
reason,
an
image
which
Lucretius
has
used
repeatedly
or the
revelation
f
Epicurean
philos-
ophy,'0
he over
can
become a
proper
Epicurean
nd
make the
best
of
reality.
After such
conciliatory
ines Lucretius
rapidlychanges
his
tone.
Throughout
his ectionhe
has included
womenwith
men n his
demon-
stration f ove's
folly:
hey oo
want
o possesstheir
artner ut
cannot.
Untilnow, however,he has sympathizedwithmen and made womenseemthe
deceitful nes, the
nstigatorsf
ealousy
and
causes ofbitter-
ness, as ifthey
had
actively
bettedmen's
delusions bout
themselves.
Now
that he has
admitted hat
defects
maybe
overlooked,he
moves
away
from
atire
to a
more
fair-minded
nd
Epicurean
approach.
He
says that women
mayfeel
ove
genuinely nec
ficto more) nd
desire
mutualpleasure
1192-1196). 1
hen
he corroborates is
statement
yde-
scribing
he
behavior
fanimalsof
both exes
1197-1208).
He
concludes
that
ll
living reatures
earchfor
shared
pleasure,
ommuni'
voluptas
(1208).
The
comparison
o
animals
may
ound
ike
traditional
misogyny.
On
the
contrary,
ere
it is based
on
one
of Epicureanism's
most en-
lightened octrines, hatpeople and animalsfunction ccording o the
same
processesof
nature.
Lucretius llustrateshis
doctrine
hroughout
the
poemwith
xamplesfrom
reaming,
he
exercise f
will,
nd
expres-
sions of
emotion,
s well as
biological
functions.'2 he
paragraph s a
positive
cknowledgementhat
uch a
doctrinepplies to
oveas well.
In
the ourse
of the ection
n love,
Lucretius
uggests wo
alternatives
for the
Roman
male as
an
escape from
destructiveove
affairs.
Both
require n end
to
self-delusion.
or theshort
un, n the
earlierpassage
he
advises
going
to a
prostitute
1070-1072);' forthe
ongrun,
ateron
he advises
settling
nto a
relationship
escribed n the
anguage of
both
10
The
light
f
reason: 1.
146-148,
115-1117; .
55-61;
3.
87-93;
5.
1454-1457;
.
35-41,
and
other
assages.
I
Bailey
ntroduces
his
ection
with
he
comment,
The
woman's
ove is
often
s
gen-
uine
as
the
man's
(p.
1312).
Lucretius
oes
not
make
the
comparison;
Bailey
s
assuming
that
he
man's
love s
tself
lways
genuine.
12
For
discussions
f
Lucretius'
use of
animals
ee
Anne
Amory,
Obscura
de re
ucida
carmina:
cience
nd
Poetry n
DeRerum
Natura,
YCS21
(1969)
145-68,
sp.
pp.
161-64;
Richard
Minadeo,
The
Lyre
of
Science: Form
nd
Meaning
n
Lucrelius'
De
Rerum
Natura
(Detroit
1969)
on
the
natural
ycle ;
CharlesF.
Saylor,
Man,
Animal,
nd
the
Bestial n
Lucretius,
CJ
67
(1972)
306-16;
Aya
Betensky,
A
Lucretian
Version
of
Pastoral,
Ramus
5
(1976)
45-58;
and
Urs
Dierauer,
Tier
und
Mensch
m
Denken der
A
ntike.
tudien
zur
Tierpsychologie,
nthropologie
nd
Ethik
Amsterdam
977),
pp.
194-98,
75-77;
nd
see
p.
298
below.
Amory nd
Sayloreach notein passing thatLucretius s notso vehe-mentlygainst ove but is more
positive
han
commentators
cknowledge
p.
162, n.
31,
and
p.
308,
n.
12,
respectively).
erhapsthe
nimal
comparisons
hat
re their
ubject
pro-
vide
better
erspective
or
valuating
ucretius'
ttitudes
o
human
beings.
13
This
was
also
the
elder
Cato's
advice,
according o
Porphyry
n
Horace
Serm. 1.
2.
31.
This content downloaded from 129.67.63.107 on Sun, 25 May 2014 18:36:10 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/9/2019 Betensky Lucretius and Love Classical World
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/betensky-lucretius-and-love-classical-world 5/10
294
AYA BETENSKY
friendship
nd marriage.
e devotesbout
one-thirdfthe ntireove
section1209-1287)o advice boutgeneticsnd fertilityn marriage,
natural
xtension
f the cientificoneof the nimal omparison.
he
main oint
s that
nfertilitys not punishment
rom he odsbut sign
of
the ncompatibilityfgenetic
eeds,
which reproduced,uite emo-
cratically,yboth artners.
ailey
emarks ith urprise
hat ucretius
soundsmore ike good
Roman
aterfamiliasere han
nywherelse n
the poem,
s he talks bout
what s proper or our
wives, nostris
coniugibus
1277).Lucretiuslso
sounds ike good
Aristotelian.
n-
deed,here
ecombinescience,
picureanism,
ndRoman radition.'4
At
the nd
of Book 4 Lucretiusepeats
is
convictionhat ove
does
not omefrom upid's rrow ndcharacterizest nsteads consuetudo,
a gradual, onscious,
ndrealistic rocess
f learningo livewith n-
other
erson
1278-1287).
he
term s
synonymous
ith oncubitusr
matrimonium,
n
addition o
meaning intrigue r
affair
(in
Terence ndLivy).
t
is also
the
Epicurean
erm
or
riendship.
he of-
ficial ndritual spects
f marriagere clearly
ubordinated
ere o ts
personalspects.
picurean heory
eems o have been
mbivalentn
this ubject. exual ctivity
as ometimes
onsideredgood
release nd
sometimes
angerous.
picurus
asopposed
o
marriage
ecause f
ts
inconvenience,ut
espectednd
helped
is
friends'hildren.'
ucretius
himself
akes he
evelopmentf familyies
mportant
n
ofteningnd
civilizing ankind5. 1011-1027),nd hespeaks ympatheticallyfthe
attachment
etweenhildrennd
parents3.
894-896).I6
oman radition
naturallyncouraged
arriage
ecause
f the
need o maintain
amily
name, power
and wealth mong
the
upper
classes,
as well
as
the state's
need for rmies nd rulers. ucretius
as combined
ome of bothworlds,
perhaps
adding
his own
interpretation
f
Epicurean
doctrine.He
de-
scribesmarriage
n terms
of friendship,
he
highest
Epicurean
ideal,
whileyet
etaininghe
cceptableRoman context.
Such
a
conclusionfollows
ogically
rom ucretius'
arlier
tatements
about
overlooking efects,
nd
he thusconnects
ove
to the
gradual nd
purposeful
ttainment
f the
Epicurean
ife.
Marriage
s described n
such a lowkey, fter hesharpbrilliancend offensivenessf the ttack
against
passion,
that
readers
may
not realizeLucretius
s
offering
real
solution.
e has
carefullyhaped
is
onclusion
o
answer is
ntroduc-
tion f
ove:extreme
uman motions
re calmed
s the
magery
f the
sweet rop of
Venus,
which
oon
turns
hilling1059-1060),
s
trans-
formed
nto
he
lower,
more eutral
nd
more
atural
rocess
f
water
dripping
nto
stone.'7
14
Bailey's comment, . 1316. Lucretius
s
reflecting
he
nterest ristotle howed
n
de
Generatione nimalium,
istoriaA nimalium, nd de Partibus
A nimalium.
15
For
Epicurus n sexual
activity,ee Bailey's references,. 1303. On marriage,
ee DL
10.119,19-21;Usener 4; J.M. Rist,Epicurus, n IntroductionCambridge 972),pp. 134
and 138 the
atter
comparison f
Epicut
an
attitudes oward
marriage
nd
friendship).
16
His
sympathyan be realeven though t s true hat he
passage tself s satirical. ny-
der
considers
t
atirical
nd
insincere
note4) pp.
18-19.
17
Compare
the
earlier
xample
of
water
dripping
n stone
nd
wearing
t
away 1.
313)
and
of
waves
wearing way
rocks
1. 326-327).
This content downloaded from 129.67.63.107 on Sun, 25 May 2014 18:36:10 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/9/2019 Betensky Lucretius and Love Classical World
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/betensky-lucretius-and-love-classical-world 6/10
LUCRETIUSND OVE
295
But
why hesharpness f this ttack
on
passion?
s it
really
motivated
ornecessary? he vehemencemany eadershaveperceivedn t has ledto
the
theory,
ased
on
themyth
f the
ove-potion,
hatLucretius s
speak-
ing bitterly r
in
madness
of his own
experiences
nd that
he hated
women.This s too
simplistic
view;
t does
not eventake accountof his
occasional fairness o
women,
or
of
the
conspicuously
Roman tone
of
the
genetics assage.
It makes more sense
to
see,
first f
all,
the
traditions
f diatribe nd
satire t work
here, pointing
o
the evils of a sick
society.'8
ucretius'
insistence
n the evils of
passion
is neither arsher
nor
more
sardonic
than
his
insistence
n
other
ections
f the
poem
on the
corruptions
f
greed, mbition, uperstition,r the fear of death. Whenhe discounts
theterror f
myths
bout
sinners
n
Hades,
he
gives qual
weight
o
Tan-
talus, who fears
the
gods; Tityos,
who is
consumed
by love; Sisyphus,
who
hungers orpower;
nd
the
Danaids,
who waste ife n
greed 3.
978-
1010). Each is an
example
of
a universal
ice,
as
contemporary
s
it is
mythological.
All of
these
are
evils
because theyrob
the
individual f
self-controlnd make
his
ife nd others'
unstable nd
wretched.
What s
particularly angerous
bout
losing
self-controls
that, first,
ne sur-
renders
reewill,
nd is
therefore
s
much slave to
passionas he
might
have been to fate and the
gods; and,
second,
that
n
one's
appetite
for
love,which annot
be satiated ike
hunger
nd
thirst,'9
ne
violatesnat-
ural boundaries ixed orhumanbehavior n the nalogyofthephysical
boundaries and rules fixed for
the
operation
of
the
universe
finita
potestas
tque
lte
erminus
aerens,
.
76-77;
.
89-90).'0
uch
xamples
of
human
vice
were raditional efore
ucretius
nd
remained o for
en-
turies.
The
contrast
hat
needed to be
made between ice and
virtue
e-
manded great
eal of
rhetorical
xaggeration.
Anotherreason for
the
seemingharshness f
Lucretius'criticism
f
love sthe hange n
attitudes
incehis time.We are now
readier oattack
contemporary
orms
f othervices
together
ith
he
atirist:
estructive
quests
for
progress, iolence,political
orruption,
orporate reed.But
we do not consider ove or even ust vice.The concept f romanticove
has
risen n
value,
thanks n
part o
theRoman ove
poets, Virgil's
Dido,
and
courtly
ove. So
has
the
concept
of female
quality. These we
are
ready
to
defend.
Lucretius annot be
made over to
satisfy ur require-
ments, utwe
should ry o
understand im
on his ownterms.
Yet another
actor
n
Lucretius' reatment
f ove sconcerned n a
dif-
ferent
way
with he
conceptofromantic
ove. WhatLucretius s
attack-
ing s a romantic
nd obsessive
ttitude o love which
mayhaveexisted n
life, hen
nd now,and which
we certainly
ind eflectednd
amplifiedn
literature.
n
a sensethemodels
of fictionre always
morepowerful
han
18
See B. P. Wallach's ucretiusndtheDiatribegainsthe earofDeath,De Rerum
Natura
.
830-1094,
nem.,
uppl. 0
1976).
19
Lucretiusses n
unnamed
antalus
ype n 4.
1097-1104
s
an
example f
nsatia-
bility.
20
1430-1433s
one
of
many
assages
n
Book5
where
ucretius
riticizes
uman
is-
regard
f
hese
oundaries.
This content downloaded from 129.67.63.107 on Sun, 25 May 2014 18:36:10 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/9/2019 Betensky Lucretius and Love Classical World
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/betensky-lucretius-and-love-classical-world 7/10
296
AYA
BETENSKY
life, o thatLucretiuswas right oconsider hem specialdanger;Plato
would
have
agreed
withhim.
Literary
models of
obsessive ove
have
ranged
rom
haedra to
Proust's
Swann. A
particular
modelthat
maybe
usefulhere s the
poet-lover
n
Catullus' love
poems.
Since
Catulluswas
contemporary
ith
Lucretius,
t
is
reasonable
to
assume that
he
repre-
sents
attitudeswith
which
Lucretius
was
familiar.
Lucretius'
atire
on
love gains
evenmore
point
f t
s
read as a
commentaryn
thewayof
ife
of
the
Catullan over.
Some
critics
ave
claimed hat
Lucretiuss
criticiz-
ing
Catullus' own words
and the
way
of
life
of
his
circleof
friends;
we
may at least
take the
Catullan over
s
an
example
of the
type
Lucretius
has in
mind,
type hat
xisted n Latin
iterature,
speciallyn
the ub-
category xclusus mator,as early s Plautus and Terence.2'This type
exemplifies
rival kind
of withdrawal
rom
veryday
Roman
life
and
perhaps even
an
insidious
popularized
form of
Epicureanism
which
Lucretius
maywell
have
beenanxious
to
combat.
Both
poets
use
the
conventional
anguage
of
disease
and
insanity
or
love's
obsessiveness.
ucretius'
description f the
over's
lassitude nd
contempt
or
the forum
may
remind s
of Catullus'
use
of
otium
c.
10,
50
and
51). Catullus
describes
erceptively
he
awakening f the
over's
doubts and his
realizationnot
only
of his
mistress'
nworthiness,
ut
of
his own
blindness
n
imagining
n
impossible deal
for
her.
The
resulting
disillusionmentreates sharp polarizationfor theCatullan loverbe-
tween he
deal, goddess-like eroin-Lesbia and
the whore
Lesbia,
the
same
polarization
we find
for
Venus
n
De Rerum
Natura
4.
When the
Catullan over riticizes
esbia,
he
s
more
avageby
far han
s
Lucretius
whenhe
criticizeshose
nicknamed
mistresses.22
21
On
the
exclusus
mator, ee F. 0.
Copley, ExclususAtmator. Sludy n Latin Love
Poetry Baltimore1956). Was Catullus a source forLucretius, r did they efer ack and
forth
o
each other?
Elaborate theoriesnvolving
heir
eath dates have been created, nd
verbal nd dramatic oincidences ited, ncluding se of Cybele nd relationship o Gaius
Memmius.See TenneyFrank'srather
nconvincing The Mutual Borrowings nd What
They mply, CP28(1933)249-56;
L.
Ferrero, oeticanuovain Lucrezio Florence1949);
Leon Herrmann's lso unconvincing Catulle et Lucr&e, Latomus 15 (1956) 465-80
(Lucretius commentingn Catullus) and his
later Lucrece et les amours de Catulle,
Studi Castiglioni Florence 1960) 445-50
(Lucretius
and
Catullus borrowed from ach
other).
Wormell
note 1)
is
certain
hatLucretius riticized
atullus
ndhiscirclefor heir
poetry
nd
way
of
life;
Lieberg
note 3)
finds ommon
themes;
C.
W.
Mendell,
Latin
Poetry:
The New Poets and
the
A
ugustans West Haven 1965), pp.
14-27
onsiders ucre-
tius new poet ;
and
Kenney note 3) thinks
ucretiusmay
have readCatullus.
22
We might ompare Catullus' question to Lesbia, cui labella
mordebis?
8. 18) with
Lucretius'bitingovers 1079-1083,1101-1104).
n
Catullusc. 5
the
phrase
onturbabimus
illa (I1) challengesLesbia to confuse he
number f kisses
o
jealous old men
will
not be
able
to
cast spells;
Lucretius dvises he
over, onturbes
ulnera
1070),
confuse
new
pas-
sion by assaulting
t withnew wounds
fromprostitutes. aileynotes
this
atter
orre-
spondence
without iscussion
d
loc. Two of Catullus'
idealizing oems might
ave
been
Lucretius' exts or he over's blindness: . 86 formulatesesbia's beautybycontrastwith
Quintia's, and
c.
43 proclaims hatAmeaena
s
no
matchfor
Lesbia. Lucretius'reductive
translation
f the
pet
name
chariton
mia,
totamerum al
(1162)
as
squat
and dwarfish
seems
to mock
and
further
xaggerate
hese favorite
ontemporary
nd
Catuilan
expres-
sions. Tota merum
al
might e an absurd
onflation
f
sal
and
meros mores
13. 5
and
9).
Catullus also uses sal
for
wit
n
12
.4 and 16 .7.
(Afranius rg.
0
is an earlier nstance f
This content downloaded from 129.67.63.107 on Sun, 25 May 2014 18:36:10 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/9/2019 Betensky Lucretius and Love Classical World
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/betensky-lucretius-and-love-classical-world 8/10
LUCRETIUS
ND
OVE
297
ButCatulluslso tries or compromiseetweenis mpossibledeal
and
his
pessimistic
iewof love's
reality.
ike
Lucretius',
is
com-
promise lso involves
marriage,
ut
as
one
might xpect
t
is
a
more
romanticersion
f
marriage
nwhich ecombines
ersonal
nd
mytho-
logical
lements ith
still-recognizable
oman radition
c. 61, 62,
and
68).
In68 he dmitsnd
s
willing
o
accept
he
nconsistency
etween
is
hopes or esbia's
fidelity
ndher emonstrated
nfidelity,
etween
deal
and
reality,
hus,
s
it
were,
omantically
ollowing
ucretius'
dvice.
Lucretius'ttack n romanticove
does
notmean
hat
he
s never
o-
mantic
imself.
uthis
romantic iew s
turned
ot
toward
uman o-
mance ut
oward he
arger
nd ess
personalromance f
thenatural
ideal.Lovefinds placehere, oo. So farwe have eenhim ounseling
realism
hich
s
partly
oman nd
partlypicurean. ut
heres
more
o
be
said
of
his
portrait
f
Venus.
he
s
not
merely
ex,
nd
this s
not
her
only
ppearance
n
the
poem.When
he
ppears
t
the
poem's
pening,
she
s
entirely
ifferentrom
he
Venus fBook
4. Inthe
Proem o
Book
I
she
symbolizes
reation,
pringtime,
picurean
pleasure,
Mother
Earth,
nd
Nature
erself
these
wowill
ater ssume
er
ole),
nd
sug-
gests
s well the
charming
nd
seductive
phrodite
f the
Homeric
hymns.he
singingines,
with
heir
postrophesnd
direct
ddress,
x-
press he
oy ofall
living
eings t
the
vibrancy
f
her
rrival.
At
the
same ime he salsoa Roman oddess,hemotherf Aeneas ndcon-
sortof
Mars.
She alone
can insure
ertility
nd
peace,and
therefore
Lucretius
egins is
poem
with
hymn
raising er nd
requestinger
help.
t s an
idyllic
icture f
Epicurean
leasure
nd
tranquility
hich
Lucretius
ssociates
n
thenatural
evelwith
heproper
rocreationf
each
pecies,
nd
on
the
human
evelwith
eacefor
heRomans.
But
n
Book4
nothingf
this ortrait
emains.
enus'
quieting
m-
brace
f
Mars,
who
s
wounded
o
beneficently
y
ove, s
replaced y he
unquiet
mbraces
f
menand
women
wounded
isastrously
y love.
Whydoes
Lucretius
olarizeVenus
o? Why
s she
made o
idyllicn
Book
1
and so
bleak n
Book
4? Simply
ut,one
portraitf
her
rep-
resentsn deal,while he therepresentseality.
The
Venus f
Proem
representsn
deal
natural orld
ntowhich
he
Epicurean as the
power
owithdraw
wayfrom
eality.t
existsnthis
form
nly
ymbolically;
ucretius
ould
be thefirst
oadmit
hat ll is
atoms
nd
void,
nd
thatVenus
oes not
ctually
ppear
t
springtime;
but
her
presence
nites
aturend
humanity
nthe
ifegivingatural
cycle f
things.23he
Venus fBook
4
representshe
bleak
eality hich
the
picurean
deal
ttemptso
supplant.
merum
al, citedby
Bailey.)
Lucretius riticizes
he
deal of
venustas Cat.
3 .2
and 36 .17
for
venustus)
nd
perhaps .
86
itselfwhen
he
urges
he
over
o
reject woman
even f he
has the
powerof
Venus
herself; errero
note
21),
Lieberg note 3) and
Kenneynote 3)compare . 1171-1172 ndCat. 86. 5-6.
23
Despite
the
echnical
on-involvementf
the
gods,she
representseal
forces: n 1.
44-
49
see Paul
Friedlander,
The
Epicurean
Theology
n Lucretius'
First
Prooemium I. 44-
49),
TAPA 70
1959) 368-79.
This content downloaded from 129.67.63.107 on Sun, 25 May 2014 18:36:10 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/9/2019 Betensky Lucretius and Love Classical World
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/betensky-lucretius-and-love-classical-world 9/10
298 AYA BETENSKY
The naturalworld s an ever-present
xample f this deal; for nimals
it exists utomatically, s it once did for primitivemankind. n it all is
physical rocess.
There
re
no ethical
problems,
or
nimalsdo not need
to make decisions bout theproper
way
to
live; nstead,nature rovides
for them
5. 218-234).
Hence the animals follow Venus instinctivelyn
Proem 1.
But
human beingshave
more troublewithVenus, as
we
have
seen.
In
thehuman
realm he
Epicurean
deal shardtoachieve,forreal-
ity
s
full
f
greed, ust, mbition, nd
destruction. he reason s not that
humans are more complex than animals. Lucretius nsists hat animals
have the ame feelings s people and
that ack of speech s a trivial iffer-
ence 5. 1056-1061).
The
real
reason
s
people's lack
of
rationality
n
the
use of their ntelligencend lack of respect for natural boundaries.
Lucretiushas to show in concrete erms hat rrationality
s
making he
good
life
mpossible
for his
contemporaries.ndeed,
he has to describe
reality n heightened olors in orderto set his ideal against t. Whatto
escapefrom
s as
important
s what
o
escape to,
and
positive
deals are
always esscolorful
o
describe
han the
terrible eality.
ut at
the
same
time
he
has
to
teachthe
readerhow to
cope
with
eality
efore
t
destroys
thepossibility f an ideal. So
the
poem
has a double structure,picurean
and
Roman,
deal
and reality.
One of Lucretius'methods f teaching
he
reader
o
manage reality
s
to
start
imply,
hento move
slowly
owardgreater omplexity.24
rom
single toms he proceeds otheir ombinationsndmotion, rom hysics
to
physiology, umanbehavior, nd
psychology.
uman fears
f
death
are oftenmentioned ut are treated
ully nly
t
the nd of Book
3,
after
the
physics
f the
soul's
dissolution
ave been
explained
t
length.
Nat-
ural destruction
s saved
for
the
plague
at the end of Book
6,
after
he
painstakingly
ationalisticccounts
f natural
henomena,
lthough
ef-
erences
o
it
occur
throughout.
n
the ame
way,
Venus n Proem
com-
bines the Roman
and
Epicureanism
n
an
ideal but
disembodied
way.
Only
whenthe
readerhas
progressed
ufficiently
n
the
poem
s
he
ready
to
face the
Roman
reality
f
Venus,
and
finally
o
accept
some sort
of
reconciliation etween er wo spects.
In
his idealizations,Lucretius ombines
traditionalRoman ideals of
simplicity, rugality,nd uprightness ithEpicureanethics.The picnic
scene
of
2. 29-33
s
a
good example f
self-sufficiencynd communityn
a natural
etting, inging ostalgic
choes
of
the
Sabines'
outdoor
ife
s
well as
of
theGarden.
That
is why
Lucretius an sound at the ame time
both Roman and
un-Roman.
But
those
Roman deals
can
carry
im
only
part
of
the
way,
for
his own ideals are
so
radical that
their
ealization
goes beyond
raditionalism
nd
verges
n
iconoclasm.He
wants o
main-
tain
the Roman
moral foundation
o
beloved
n
legends
f
earlyRome,
but
he
must
destroy
he
corrupt uperstructure,
hichno
longer
bears
muchresemblance o thefoundation. or himpoliticians re no longer
statesmen,
nd
war
s
no
longer
matter f
self-defense
r
patriotism
ut
rather f
self-aggrandizement.
hat
he s
trying
o create
n
his
poem
s a
24
See
Leo Strauss,
Notes on Lucretius, n
LiberalismAncient nd Modern (New
York 1969)76-87. His terms
re to movefrom he sweet
to the bitter.
This content downloaded from 129.67.63.107 on Sun, 25 May 2014 18:36:10 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8/9/2019 Betensky Lucretius and Love Classical World
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/betensky-lucretius-and-love-classical-world 10/10