Letter 9026: When referring to a certain orator of our own times, who was a straightforward and level-headed speaker, but lacked...

To Lupercus. When referring to a certain orator of our own times, who was a straightforward and level-headed speaker, but lacked the grand manner and ornateness, I said, rather neatly in my opinion, "He has no faults, except it be a fault that he has none." For an orator ought to soar to great heights and be carried away by his feelings, and, on some occasions, he ought to rage and storm, and frequently get near the brink of a precipice, for precipices usually lie near high and exalted places. One travels more safely along level ground, but the road is low and undistinguished, and those who run are more likely to stumble than those who creep, yet the latter get no credit for not falling, while the former, despite their fall, often do. It is exactly the same with oratory as with other arts; it is the difficulty of the task which makes the credit of the achievement. You may notice how the tight-rope walkers, who are struggling along at a great height, evoke the loudest applause just when they seem to be on the point of falling, for those events create most wonder which are least expected, most hazardous, and, as the Greeks still better express it, are most recklessly daring. The skill of a helmsman is by no means so great when he is sailing on a smooth sea as when a tempest is raging; in the former case, there is no one to wonder at his skill as he enters the harbour unheeded and without applause; it is only when the ropes are creaking, and the mast is bent, and the helm is groaning, that the pilot appears in all his glory, and seems most like one of the deities of the sea. I am writing in this strain, because I think you have marked some passages in my works as turgid which I consider lofty, and others, as indiscreet and overdone, which seem to me to be boldly and adequately dealt with. But it makes all the difference whether the marks you have made signify your disapproval of a passage, or merely that it is a striking one. For anything which stands out conspicuously catches the eye, but it requires careful attention to decide whether it is out of proportion or cast on a grand scale, whether it is lofty or disproportionately high. But let me refer to Homer for examples, for who can fail to notice the extreme differences of style between "The great heaven trumpeted around," "His lance rested on the clouds," and all the passage beginning, "Not so loud thunders the wave of the sea" ? * One needs the most delicate pair of scales to decide whether these are empty marvels, which no one should credit, or magnificent and divinely inspired passages. I do not, of course, say that I have ever uttered parallel passages to these, or that I ever could utter them. I am not so mad as all that, but the point I do wish to make is that sometimes eloquence must be given a free rein, and that the rush of genius must not be restrained within too narrow a circuit. But, you will say, there is one rule for orators, and another for poets. Still, Marcus Tullius showed just the same daring as Homer - and yet I will say no more about Tullius, for, with respect to him, there is no possibility of dispute. However, take the case of Demosthenes, who is the pattern and model of all orators. Does he rein and curb himself in that well-known passage, "these scoundrels, flatterers, and polluted wretches," or again, "Not with walls of stone or brick did I fortify the city," or again, "Did I not set Euboea to be a bulwark to Attica on the side of the sea" ? or again, "For my own part, men of Athens, I swear I think he is intoxicated by the vastness of his own achievements"? ** What could be more daring than the fine digression beginning, "For a disease ..." or than this passage, shorter than those I have quoted above, but equally bold, "Then indeed I resisted the audacity of Python's eloquence, which was rushing like a tide upon you"? † In the same style he writes: "When any one rises to power, as Philip has done, by avarice and villainy, at the first pretext and little slip he makes, the horse throws him and destroys him utterly." In a similar vein he speaks of a person as "roped off from all the just men in the city," and in another place he says : "You, Aristogeiton, have cast on one side, or rather have utterly destroyed your sense of compassion for such offences as these; do not, therefore, think of anchoring for safety in harbours which you have yourself blocked up and choked with rocks." Again he says: "I do not see that he can get a foothold on any one of these places, for all round him there are precipices, yawning gulfs, and abysses." He goes on: "I am afraid that some people will think that you specially train in villainy any citizen who seems set on being a villain," and further he adds; "For I don't think that your ancestors built these law courts in order that you might graft such people as these in them." Or again: "But if he is a dealer in villainy and peddles it again, and hucksters it from one customer to another ..." †† There are a thousand other instances, not to speak of the phrases which Aeschines said were not "words" but "fireworks." ‡ I am arguing against my argument, and you will say that Demosthenes is censured for these extravagances of his. But just notice how much finer Demosthenes is than his critic, and finer just because of his extravagances. Elsewhere, he shows his force, in these passages he shows how much he towers above others. Besides, did Aeschines abstain from the faults which he carped at in Demosthenes? What about this sentence: "For the orator and the law ought to speak with the same voice. And when the law speaks with one voice, and the orator with another -" ? Or again; "He then clearly reveals his intentions in broad daylight -" And again; "But taking your seats and places in the assembly, drive him to speak contrary to the laws." This phrase pleased him so much that he repeats it: "But, as though you were sitting watching the horse races, you drive him into the very track of the matter." Again, is this couched in a more reserved and less swelling vein; "But you rip up old sores," or "Seizing him as a pirate in full sail through the commonwealth"? ‡‡ I might instance other examples as well. I quite expect that you will set against certain passages in this letter, such as "the helm groans," and "most like one of the deities of the sea," the same marks as those about which I am now writing. For I find that while seeking to excuse myself for earlier faults, I have fallen into the very ones which you have set your marks against. Well, you may mark away to your heart's content, provided that you will appoint a day when we may have a talk together and argue out the points in question. For either you will make me more timid, or I will make you more inclined to be rash. Farewell. [Note: Homer, Iliad xxi. 388; v. 356; xiv.394. ] [Note: Demosthenes, De Corona 296, 299, 301; Philippic i. 49. ] (†) Demosthenes, De Falsa Legatione 259; De Corona 136; Olynthiac ii. 9. (††) Demosthenes, In Aristogeit. i. 28, 84, 76, 7, 48, 46. (‡) Aeschines, Ctes. 167 (‡‡) Aeschines, Ctes. 16, 101, 206; Timarch. 176; Ctes. 208, 253.

L To Lupercus. When referring to a certain orator of our own times, who was a straightforward and level-headed speaker, but lacked the grand manner and ornateness, I said, rather neatly in my opinion, "He has no faults, except it be a fault that he has none." For an orator ought to soar to great heights and be carried away by his feelings, and, on some occasions, he ought to rage and storm, and frequently get near the brink of a precipice, for precipices usually lie near high and exalted places. One travels more safely along level ground, but the road is low and undistinguished, and those who run are more likely to stumble than those who creep, yet the latter get no credit for not falling, while the former, despite their fall, often do. It is exactly the same with oratory as with other arts; it is the difficulty of the task which makes the credit of the achievement. You may notice how the tight-rope walkers, who are struggling along at a great height, evoke the loudest applause just when they seem to be on the point of falling, for those events create most wonder which are least expected, most hazardous, and, as the Greeks still better express it, are most recklessly daring. The skill of a helmsman is by no means so great when he is sailing on a smooth sea as when a tempest is raging; in the former case, there is no one to wonder at his skill as he enters the harbour unheeded and without applause; it is only when the ropes are creaking, and the mast is bent, and the helm is groaning, that the pilot appears in all his glory, and seems most like one of the deities of the sea. I am writing in this strain, because I think you have marked some passages in my works as turgid which I consider lofty, and others, as indiscreet and overdone, which seem to me to be boldly and adequately dealt with. But it makes all the difference whether the marks you have made signify your disapproval of a passage, or merely that it is a striking one. For anything which stands out conspicuously catches the eye, but it requires careful attention to decide whether it is out of proportion or cast on a grand scale, whether it is lofty or disproportionately high. But let me refer to Homer for examples, for who can fail to notice the extreme differences of style between "The great heaven trumpeted around," "His lance rested on the clouds," and all the passage beginning, "Not so loud thunders the wave of the sea" ? * One needs the most delicate pair of scales to decide whether these are empty marvels, which no one should credit, or magnificent and divinely inspired passages. I do not, of course, say that I have ever uttered parallel passages to these, or that I ever could utter them. I am not so mad as all that, but the point I do wish to make is that sometimes eloquence must be given a free rein, and that the rush of genius must not be restrained within too narrow a circuit. But, you will say, there is one rule for orators, and another for poets. Still, Marcus Tullius showed just the same daring as Homer - and yet I will say no more about Tullius, for, with respect to him, there is no possibility of dispute. However, take the case of Demosthenes, who is the pattern and model of all orators. Does he rein and curb himself in that well-known passage, "these scoundrels, flatterers, and polluted wretches," or again, "Not with walls of stone or brick did I fortify the city," or again, "Did I not set Euboea to be a bulwark to Attica on the side of the sea" ? or again, "For my own part, men of Athens, I swear I think he is intoxicated by the vastness of his own achievements"? ** What could be more daring than the fine digression beginning, "For a disease ..." or than this passage, shorter than those I have quoted above, but equally bold, "Then indeed I resisted the audacity of Python's eloquence, which was rushing like a tide upon you"? † In the same style he writes: "When any one rises to power, as Philip has done, by avarice and villainy, at the first pretext and little slip he makes, the horse throws him and destroys him utterly." In a similar vein he speaks of a person as "roped off from all the just men in the city," and in another place he says : "You, Aristogeiton, have cast on one side, or rather have utterly destroyed your sense of compassion for such offences as these; do not, therefore, think of anchoring for safety in harbours which you have yourself blocked up and choked with rocks." Again he says: "I do not see that he can get a foothold on any one of these places, for all round him there are precipices, yawning gulfs, and abysses." He goes on: "I am afraid that some people will think that you specially train in villainy any citizen who seems set on being a villain," and further he adds; "For I don't think that your ancestors built these law courts in order that you might graft such people as these in them." Or again: "But if he is a dealer in villainy and peddles it again, and hucksters it from one customer to another ..." †† There are a thousand other instances, not to speak of the phrases which Aeschines said were not "words" but "fireworks." ‡ I am arguing against my argument, and you will say that Demosthenes is censured for these extravagances of his. But just notice how much finer Demosthenes is than his critic, and finer just because of his extravagances. Elsewhere, he shows his force, in these passages he shows how much he towers above others. Besides, did Aeschines abstain from the faults which he carped at in Demosthenes? What about this sentence: "For the orator and the law ought to speak with the same voice. And when the law speaks with one voice, and the orator with another -" ? Or again; "He then clearly reveals his intentions in broad daylight -" And again; "But taking your seats and places in the assembly, drive him to speak contrary to the laws." This phrase pleased him so much that he repeats it: "But, as though you were sitting watching the horse races, you drive him into the very track of the matter." Again, is this couched in a more reserved and less swelling vein; "But you rip up old sores," or "Seizing him as a pirate in full sail through the commonwealth"? ‡‡ I might instance other examples as well. I quite expect that you will set against certain passages in this letter, such as "the helm groans," and "most like one of the deities of the sea," the same marks as those about which I am now writing. For I find that while seeking to excuse myself for earlier faults, I have fallen into the very ones which you have set your marks against. Well, you may mark away to your heart's content, provided that you will appoint a day when we may have a talk together and argue out the points in question. For either you will make me more timid, or I shall make you more inclined to be rash. Farewell. (*) Homer, Iliad xxi. 388; v. 356; xiv.394. (**) Demosthenes, De Corona 296, 299, 301; Philippic i. 49. (†) Demosthenes, De Falsa Legatione 259; De Corona 136; Olynthiac ii. 9. (††) Demosthenes, In Aristogeit. i. 28, 84, 76, 7, 48, 46. (‡) Aeschines, Ctes. 167 (‡‡) Aeschines, Ctes. 16, 101, 206; Timarch. 176; Ctes. 208, 253.

C. PLINIUS LUPERCO SUO S. Dixi de quodam oratore saeculi nostri recto quidem et sano, sed parum grandi et ornato, ut opinor, apte: 'Nihil peccat, nisi quod nihil peccat.' Debet enim orator erigi attolli, interdum etiam effervescere ecferri, ac saepe accedere ad praeceps; nam plerumque altis et excelsis adiacent abrupta. Tutius per plana sed humilius et depressius iter; frequentior currentibus quam reptantibus lapsus, sed his non labentibus nulla, illis non nulla laus etiamsi labantur. Nam ut quasdam artes ita eloquentiam nihil magis quam ancipitia commendant. Vides qui per funem in summa nituntur, quantos soleant excitare clamores, cum iam iamque casuri videntur. Sunt enim maxime mirabilia quae maxime insperata, maxime opericulosa utque Graeci magis exprimunt, παράβολα. Ideo nequaquam par gubernatoris est virtus, cum placido et cum turbato mari vehitur: tunc admirante nullo, illaudatus inglorius subit portum, at cum stridunt funes curvatur arbor gubernacula gemunt, tunc ille clarus et dis maris proximus. Cur haec? Quia visus es mihi in scriptis meis adnotasse quaedam ut tumida quae ego sublimia, ut improba quae ego audentia, ut nimia quae ego plena arbitrabar. Plurimum autem refert, reprehendenda adnotes an insignia. Omnis enim advertit, quod eminet et exstat; sed acri intentione diiudicandum est, immodicum sit an grande, altum an enorme. Atque ut Homerum potissimum attingam, quem tandem alterutram in partem potest fugere ἀμφὶ δὲ σάλπιγξεν μέγας οὐρανός . . ἠέρι δ᾽ ἔγχος ἐκεκλιτο et totum illud οὔτε θαλάσσης κῦμα τόσον βοάᾳ? Sed opus est examine et libra, incredibile sint haec et inania an magnifica caelestia. Nec nunc ego me his similia aut dixisse aut posse dicere puto — non ita insanio -, sed hoc intellegi volo, laxandos esse eloquentiae frenos, nec angustissimo gyro ingeniorum impetus refringendos. 'At enim alia condicio oratorum, alia poetarum. Quasi vero M. Tullius minus audeat! Quamquam hunc omitto; neque enim ambigi puto. Sed Demosthenes ipse, ille norma oratoris et regula, num se cohibet et comprimit, cum dicit illa notissima: ἄνθρωποι μιαροοὶ καὶ κόλακες καὶ ἀλάστορες et rursus οὐ λίθοις ἐτείχισα τὴν πόλιν οὐδὲ πλίνθοις ἐγω et statim οὐκ ἐκ μὲν θαλάττης τὴν . . . εὔβοιαν προβαλέσθαι πρὸ τῆς . . . ᾿αττικῆς et alibi: ἐγὼ δὲ οἶμαι μέν, ὦ ἄνδρες . . . ᾿αθηναῖοι, νὴ τοὺς θεοὺς ἐκεῖνον μεθύειν τῷ μεγέθει τῶν πεπραγμένων? Iam quid audentius illo pulcherrimo ac longissimo excessu: νόσημα γάρ? Quid haec breviora superioribus, sed audacia paria: τότε ἐγὼ μὲν τῷ . . . πύθωνι θρασυνομένῳ καὶ πολλῷ ῥέοντι καθ᾽ ὑμῶν? Ex eadem nota ὅταν δὲ ἐκ πλεονεξίας καὶ πονηρίας τις ὥσπερ οὗτος ἰσχύσῂ, ἡ πρώτη πρόφασις καὶ μικρὸν πταῖσμα ἅπαντα ἀνεχαίτισε καὶ διέλυσε. Simile his ἀπεσχοινισμένος ἅπασι τοῖς ἐν τῇ πόλει δικαίοις et ibidem σὺ τὸν εἰς ταῦτα ἔλεον προδέδωκας, . . . ᾿αριστόγειτον, μᾶλλον δ᾽ ἀνῄρηκας ὅλως. μὴ δή, πρὸς οὓς αὐτὸς ἔχωσας λιμένας καὶ προβόλων ἐνέπλησας, πρὸς τούτους ὁρμίζου. Et dixerat: τούτῳ δ᾽ οὐδένα ὁρῶ τ̂ν τόπων τούτων βάσιμον ὄντα, ἀλλὰ πάντα ἀπόκρημνα, φάραγγας, βάραθρα. Et deinceps δέδοικα, μὴ δόξητέ τισι τὸν ἀεὶ βουλόμενον εἶναι πονηρὸν τῶν ἐν τῇ πόλει ποιδοτριβεῖν, nec satis: οὐδὲ γὰρ τοὺς προγόνους ὑπολαμβάνω τὰ δικαστήρια ταῦτα ὑμῖν οἰκοδομῆσαι, ἵνα τοὺς τοιούτους ἐν αὐτοῖς μοσχεύητε, ad hoc: εἰ δὲ κάπηλός ἐστι πονηρίας καὶ παλιγκάπηλος καὶ μεταβολεύς et mille talia, ut praeteream quae ab Aeschine θαύματα, non ῥήματα vocantur. In contrarium incidi: dices hunc quoque ob ista culpari. Sed vide, quanto maior sit, qui reprehenditur, ipso reprehendente et maior ob haec quoque; in aliis enim vis, in his granditas eius elucet. Num autem Aeschines ipse eis, quae in Demosthene carpebat, abstinuit? χρὴ γὰρ τὸ αὐτὸ φθέγγεσθαι τὸν ῥήτορα καὶ τὸν νόμον; ὅταν δὲ ἑτέραν μὲν φωνὴν ἀφιῇ ὁ νόμος, ἑτέραν δὲ ὁ ῥήτωρ. Alio loco: ἔπειτα ἀναφαίνεται περὶ πάντων ἐν τῷ ψηφίσματι Iterum alio: ἀλλ᾽ ἐγκαθήμενοι καὶ ἐνεδρεύοντες ἐν τῇ ἀκροάσει εἰσελαύνετε αὐτὸν εἰς τοὺς παρανόμους λόγους. Quod adeo probavit, ut repetat: ἀλλ᾽ ὥσπερ ἐν ταῖς ἱπποδρομίαις ἐς τὸν τοῦ πράγματος αὐτὸν δρόμον εἰσελαύνετε. Iam illa custoditius pressiusque: σὺ δὲ ἑλκοποιεῖς . . . ἢ συλλαβόντες ὡς λῃστὴν τῶν πραγμάτων διὰ τῆς πολιτείας πλέοντα; Exspecto, ut quaedam ex hac epistula ut illud 'gubernacula gemunt' et 'dis maris proximus' isdem notis quibus ea, de quibus scribo, confodias; intellego enim me, dum veniam prioribus peto, in illa ipsa quae adnotaveras incidisse. Sed confodias licet, dum modo iam nunc destines diem, quo et de illis et de his coram exigere possimus. Aut enim tu me timidum aut ego te temerarium faciam. Vale.