Letter 100
You write rne that you have read with the greatest
eagerness the work by Fabianus Papirius entitled The Duties of a Citizen,
and that it did not come up to your expectations; then, forgetting that
you are dealing with a philosopher, you proceed to criticize his style.
<Ep3-149>
Suppose, now, that your statement is true -
that he pours forth rather than places his words; let me, however, tell
you at the start that this trait of which you speak has a peculiar charm,
and that it is a grace appropriate to a smoothly-gliding style. For,
I maintain, it matters a great deal whether it tumbles forth, or flows
along. Moreover, there is a deal of deference in this regard also - as
I shall make clear to you: Fabianus seems to me to have not so much
an "efflux" as a "flow" of words: so copious is it, without confusion,
and yet not without speed. This is indeed what his style declares
and announces - that he has not spent a long time in working his matter
over and twisting it into shape. But even supposing the facts are
as you would have them; the man was building up character rather than words,
and was writing those words for the mind rather than for the ear.
Besides, had he been speaking them in his own person, you would not have
had time to consider the details - the whole work would have so swept you
along. For as a rule that which pleases by its swiftness is of less
value when taken in hand for reading.
Nevertheless, this very quality, too, of attracting at first sight is a
great advantage, no matter whether careful investigation may discover something
to criticize. If you ask me, I should say that he who has forced
approval is greater than he who has earned it; and yet I know that the
latter is safer, I know that he can give more confident guarantees for
the future. A meticulous manner of writing does not suit the philosopher;
if he is timid as to words, when will he ever be brave and steadfast, when
will he ever really show his worth? Fabianus's style was not careless,
it was assured. That is why
<Ep3-151>
you will find nothing shoddy in his work: his words are well chosen
and yet not hunted for; they are not unnaturally inserted and inverted,
according to the present-day fashion; but they possess distinction, even
though they are taken from ordinary speech. There you have honourable
and splendid ideas, not fettered into aphorisms, but spoken with greater
freedom. We shall of course notice passages that are not sufficiently pruned,
not constructed with sufficient care, and lacking the polish which is in
vogue nowadays; but after regarding the whole, you will see that there
are no futile subtleties of argument. There may, doubtless, be no
variety of marbles, no water-supply which flows from one apartment to
another, no "pauper-rooms," or any other device that luxury adds when
ill content with simple charms; but, in the vulgar phrase, it is "a good
house to live in."
F urthermore, opinions vary with regard to
the style. Some wish it to be polished down from all roughness; and
some take so great a pleasure in the abrupt manner that they would intentionally
break up any passage which may by chance spread itself out more smoothly,
scattering the closing words in such a way that the sentences may result
unexpectedly. Read Cicero: his style has unity; it moves with a modulated
pace, and is gentle without being degenerate. The style of Asinius
Pollio, on the other hand, is "bumpy," jerky, leaving off when you least
expect it. And finally, Cicero always stops gradually; while Pollio breaks
off, except in the very few cases where he cleaves to a definite rhythm
and a single pattern.
<Ep3-153>
I n addition to this, you say that everything
in Fabianus seems to you commonplace and lacking in elevation; but I myself
hold that he is free from such a fault. For that style of his is
not commonplace, but simply calm and adjusted to his peaceful and well-ordered
mind - not on a low level but on an even plane. There is lacking
the verve and spur of the orator (for which you are looking), and a sudden
shock of epigrams. But look, please, at the whole work, how well-ordered
it is: there is a distinction in it. His style does not possess,
but will suggest, dignity.
M ention someone whom you may rank ahead of
Fabianus. Cicero, let us say, whose books on philosophy are almost
as numerous as those of Fabianus. I will concede this point; but
it is no slight thing to be less than the greatest. Or Asinius Pollio,
let us say. I will yield again, and content myself by replying: "It
is a distinction to be third in so great a field." You may also include
Livy; for Livy wrote both dialogues (which should be ranked as history
no less than as philosophy), and works which professedly deal with philosophy.
I shall yield in the case of Livy also. But consider how many writers
Fabianus outranks, if he is surpassed by three only - and those three the
greatest masters of eloquence!
B ut, it may be said, he does not offer everything:
though his style is elevated, it is not strong; though it flows forth copiously,
it lacks force and sweep; it is not translucent, but it is lucid. "One
would fail," you urge, "to find therein any rugged denunciation of vice,
any courageous words in the face of danger, any proud defiance of Fortune,
any scornful threats
<Ep3-155>
against self-seeking. I wish to see luxury rebuked, lust condemned,
waywardness crushed out. Let him show us the keenness of oratory,
the loftiness of tragedy, the subtlety of comedy." You wish him to rely
on that pettiest of things, phraseology; but he has sworn allegiance to
the greatness of his subject and draws eloquence after him as a sort of
shadow, but not of set purpose. Our author will doubtless not investigate
every detail, nor subject it to analysis, nor inspect and emphasize each
separate word. This I admit. Many phrases will fall short, or will
fail to strike home, and at times the style will slip along indolently;
but there will be plenty of light throughout the work; there will be long
stretches which will not weary the reader. And, finally, he will
offer this quality of making it clear to you that he meant what he wrote.
You will understand that his aim was to have you know what pleased him,
rather than that he should please you. All his work makes for progress
and for sanity, without any search for applause. I do not doubt that
his writings are of the kind I have described, although I am harking back
to him rather than retaining a sure memory of him, and although the general
tone of his writings remains in my mind, not from a careful and recent
perusal, but in outline, as is natural after an acquaintance of long ago.
But certainly, whenever I heard him lecture, such did his work seem to
me - not solid but full, the kind which would inspire young men of promise
and rouse their ambition to become like him, without making them hopeless
of surpassing him; and this method of encouragement seems to me the most
helpful of all. For it is disheartening to inspire in a man the desire,
and to take away from
<Ep3-157>
Latin / Greek Original
[1] Fabiani Papiri libros qui inscribuntur civilium legisse te cupidissime scribis, et non respondisse expectationi tuae; deinde oblitus de philosopho agi compositionem eius accusas. Puta esse quod dicis et effundi verba, non figi. Primum habet ista res suam gratiam et est decor proprius orationis leniter lapsae; multum enim interesse existimo utrum exciderit an fluxerit. <Adice> nunc quod in hoc quoque quod dicturus sum ingens differentia est: [2] Fabianus mihi non effundere videtur orationem sed fundere; adeo larga est et sine perturbatione, non sine cursu tamen veniens. Illud plane fatetur et praefert, non esse tractatam nec diu tortam. Sed ita, ut vis, esse credamus: mores ille, non verba composuit et animis scripsit ista, non auribus. [3] Praeterea ipso dicente non vacasset tibi partes intueri, adeo te summa rapuisset; et fere quae impetu placent minus praestant ad manum relata; sed illud quoque multum est, primo aspectu oculos occupasse, etiam si contemplatio diligens inventura est quod arguat. [4] Si me interrogas, maior ille est qui iudicium abstulit quam qui meruit; et scio hunc tutiorem esse, scio audacius sibi de futuro promittere. Oratio sollicita philosophum non decet: ubi tandem erit fortis et constans, ubi periculum sui faciet qui timet verbis? [5] Fabianus non erat neglegens in oratione sed securus. Itaque nihil invenies sordidum: electa verba sunt, non captata, nec huius saeculi more contra naturam suam posita et inversa, splendida tamen quamvis sumantur e medio. Sensus honestos et magnificos habes, non coactos in sententiam sed latius dictos. Videbimus quid parum recisum sit, quid parum structum, quid non huius recentis politurae: cum circumspexeris omnia, nullas videbis angustias inanis. [6] Desit sane varietas marmorum et concisura aquarum cubiculis interfluentium et pauperis cella et quidquid aliud luxuria non contenta decore simplici miscet: quod dici solet, domus recta est.
Adice nunc quod de compositione non constat: quidam illam volunt esse ex horrido comptam, quidam usque eo aspera gaudent ut etiam quae mollius casus explicuit ex industria dissipent et clausulas abrumpant ne ad expectatum respondeant. [7] Lege Ciceronem: compositio eius una est, pedem curvat lenta et sine infamia mollis. At contra Pollionis Asinii salebrosa et exiliens et ubi minime expectes relictura. Denique omnia apud Ciceronem desinunt, apud Pollionem cadunt, exceptis paucissimis quae ad certum modum et ad unum exemplar adstricta sunt.
[8] Humilia praeterea tibi videri dicis omnia et parum erecta: quo vitio carere eum iudico. Non sunt enim illa humilia sed placida et ad animi tenorem quietum compositumque formata, nec depressa sed plana. Deest illis oratorius vigor stimulique quos quaeris et subiti ictus sententiarum; sed totum corpus, videris quam sit comptum, honestum est. Non habet oratio eius sed dabit dignitatem. [9] Adfer quem Fabiano possis praeponere. Dic Ciceronem, cuius libri ad philosophiam pertinentes paene totidem sunt quot Fabiani: cedam, sed non statim pusillum est si quid maximo minus est. Dic Asinium Pollionem: cedam, et respondeamus: in re tanta eminere est post duos esse. Nomina adhuc T. Livium; scripsit enim et dialogos, quos non magis philosophiae adnumerare possis quam historiae, et ex professo philosophiam continentis libros: huic quoque dabo locum. Vide tamen quam multos antecedat qui a tribus vincitur et tribus eloquentissimis.
[10] Sed non praestat omnia: non est fortis oratio eius, quamvis elata sit; non est violenta nec torrens, quamvis effusa sit; non est perspicua sed pura. 'Desideres' inquis 'contra vitia aliquid aspere dici, contra pericula animose, contra fortunam superbe, contra ambitionem contumeliose. Volo luxuriam obiurgari, libidinem traduci, inpotentiam frangi. Sit aliquid oratorie acre, tragice grande, comice exile.' Vis illum adsidere pusillae rei, verbis: ille rerum se magnitudini addixit, eloquentiam velut umbram non hoc agens trahit. [11] Non erunt sine dubio singula circumspecta nec in se collecta nec omne verbum excitabit ac punget, fateor; exibunt multa nec ferient et interdum otiosa praeterlabetur oratio, sed multum erit in omnibus lucis, sed ingens sine taedio spatium. Denique illud praestabit, ut liqueat tibi illum sensisse quae scripsit. Intelleges hoc actum ut tu scires quid illi placeret, non ut ille placeret tibi. Ad profectum omnia tendunt, ad bonam mentem: non quaeritur plausus.
[12] Talia esse scripta eius non dubito, etiam si magis reminiscor quam teneo haeretque mihi color eorum non ex recenti conversatione familiariter sed summatim, ut solet ex vetere notitia; cum audirem certe illum, talia mihi videbantur, non solida sed plena, quae adulescentem indolis bonae attollerent et ad imitationem sui evocarent sine desperatione vincendi, quae mihi adhortatio videtur efficacissima. Deterret enim qui imitandi cupiditatem fecit, spem abstulit. Ceterum verbis abundabat, sine commendatione partium singularum in universum magnificus. Vale.
Seneca the YoungerThe Latin Library The Classics Page