BMCR 2009.06.26: Gervais on Joyce, Statius, Thebaid: A Song of Thebes. Masters of Latin Literature

Jane Wilson Joyce (ed.), Statius, Thebaid: A Song of Thebes. Masters of
Latin Literature.  Ithaca:  Cornell University Press, 2008.  Pp. xxxv,
502.  ISBN 9780801482854.  $27.95 (pb).

Reviewed by Kyle G. Gervais, University of Otago, Dunedin
([email protected])
Word count:  2968 words
-------------------------------
To read a print-formatted version of this review, see
http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2009/2009-06-26.html
To comment on this review, see
http://www.bmcreview.org/2009/06/20090626.html
-------------------------------

Following her translation of Lucan's Pharsalia (Ithaca, 1993),
scholar-poet Jane Wilson Joyce (hereafter J.) offers a new translation
of Statius' Thebaid (hereafter St. and Th.)--including a general
introduction and prefaces to individual books, explanatory footnotes,
glossary, and an interpretive commentary--that is a major contribution
to the field. Very readable, well researched, and insightful, it should
prove useful and stimulating to students, casual readers, and serious
scholars (both Statians and the uninitiated). It addresses three
important needs. It provides the first English commentary on the epic
in its entirety (although selective and not a "scholarly commentary",
as J. admits (xxxiv), it is impressive and most welcome). It is the
first verse translation in English using a six-beat line,[[1]] which is
rapidly becoming the standard for rendering Greek and Latin hexameters.
And it is the first English translation with a decent chance of
convincing readers that St. the epic poet can be enjoyable--that his is
indeed a vox iucunda, to borrow Juvenal's description (7.82). I begin
with J.'s introduction, book prefaces, and commentary, then turn to
consider her translation (minor points and corrections are listed at
the end of the review).

INTRODUCTION

J. offers a wide-ranging introduction, discussing the political world
in which St. wrote ("Dynasty": xvi-xxiii), the important details of his
life ("Poet": xxiii-xxviii), and the literary qualities of his epic
("Poem": xxviii-xxxiii). She also touches on St.'s literary
predecessors, especially tragic poets (xiii-xiv), and describes her
approach to translation (xxxiii-xxxv). Notable are her sensitive and
sensible treatment of the repressive atmosphere under Domitian and
St.'s reaction to this (xiv-xvi, xxii), her discussion of intriguing
but speculative details of St.'s life (including his bilingualism,
travels in Greece, and early popularity in Rome: xxiv-xxv), and her
attention to St.'s personal and artistic relationship with his father
(xxiii-xxv). Evaluation of the Th.'s literary qualities, based on E. M.
W. Tillyard's discussion of the epic genre,[[2]] is less successful,
but is supplemented by the analysis she gives in the prefaces to each
book.

BOOK PREFACES

These twelve, one-page prefaces give good structural and thematic
introductions to each book, and may be read in succession as a
stimulating interpretative essay on St.'s poem. Discussion of structure
focuses on the bipartite (books 1-6, 7-12) and four-fold (1-3, 4-6,
7-9, 10-12) divisions of the epic, the ordering of each book by setting
and scene, the impact of various narrative delays, and particularly the
importance of doubling: balanced or contrasting repetition of
character, scene, setting, perspective, tone, and tempo throughout the
epic. Thematic discussions include the cosmic significance of the
Theban war, the contagiousness of Theban guilt and gradual
"Thebanization" of Argos, the futility of war, the degeneration of the
heroic ideal, and the inevitable association of power with destructive
violence. This gloomy evaluation, well in keeping with the tone of most
modern studies, draws silently on the works of most contemporary
Statian scholars, and is as good an introduction as any to current
opinion on St.'s poem. Before each preface is a book outline, showing
the major and minor scene changes and structural divisions by line
number--quite a useful reference.

COMMENTARY

J.'s interpretive commentary, comprising 111 pages, is selective and
aimed at the general reader. It is, nevertheless, insightful,
informative, and impressive in its grasp of scholarship Statian and
otherwise (in several places, J. goes further in her pursuit of
information than one would expect for a commentary of this sort: see,
e.g., her measurements for the width of the river Alpheos (n. on
6.675-7[[3]]), obtained with the help of the U.S. embassy in Athens).
Particularly impressive is her detailed commentary on the catalogues in
books 4, 7, and 12, the archaeological information she brings to bear
on the Nemean Games in book 6 (this section of the epic has until now
been without any modern commentary), and her treatment of book 12 as an
epyllion that doubles the main epic. I also welcome her focus on the
poem's wit, the careful artistry with which it presents battlefield
death and violence, and the influence of the contemporary Roman world
on St.'s writing and his audience's reception. Aside from a number of
minor errors or dubious points (inevitable in a commentary of this
scope; I note these at the end of the review), the two biggest
drawbacks of this commentary are almost unavoidable: because J.
comments on her English translation, rather than the Latin text of the
Th., and because her book is addressed to an English-language
readership, she has chosen to omit nearly all discussion of Statian
intertextuality and to cite English-language scholarship almost
exclusively. Understandable choices, but regrettable--particularly
concerning intertextuality, a central element in St.'s poetic technique
and modern studies on his poems (as J. acknowledges: xxxiv-xxxv) to
which J. would undoubtedly have made useful contributions. The
commentary is supplemented by copious explanatory footnotes and a
comprehensive glossary to help both student and scholar deal with St.'s
difficult poem.

TRANSLATION

Turning to the most important consideration: J.'s translation. It is,
on the whole, an impressive feat: written in a "loose, six-beat line"
(xxxv) with a one-to-one correspondence between Latin and English
lines, it suggests much of the energy, humour, and inventiveness of
St.'s Latin which is often obscured in the more sombre style that has
characterized English translations. At the same time, J.'s confident
and distinctive poetic voice shines through--sometimes at the expense
of St.'s meaning or (to my ear) his tone, but more often with happy
results. As with any translation, faults may be found. I briefly
outline these (minor errors are listed below this review) before
turning to a few excerpts from the translation, which should clearly
show its strengths.

At its best, the six-beat line is almost certainly better than blank
verse for translating hexameters (there are exceptions: blank verse
seems to be the right choice for Ovid, and Sarah Ruden's new blank
verse Aeneid (New Haven, 2008) is often stunning). But this loose
metre, if both poet and reader are not careful, runs the risk of losing
its rhythm entirely. J.'s lines are often quite loose (turning to a
page at random, I find 1.77-8: "O/h no/! A/rrogant ki/ngs--how ga/lling
it i/s!--the/y, in my lo/ng // dea/th, deri/de their fa/ther's
da/rkness, they loa/the his groa/ns. Am I/..."; eight and seven beats,
by my count). This combines with her consistently bold line-breaks
(take 7.195-214: of 20 lines, only three or four are end-stopped, and
lines end with "not", "And", "I" (2X), "But", and "Still,"). The result
could have looked like prose in verse-form--if J. were a lesser poet.
Luckily, she shows a strong sense of the natural rhythms of English,
which consistently drives her verse forward. Thus, she writes: "Now, I
hold no grudge on my own account, nor require the dire /
Oedipodionide^s to die" (7.215-16; note the impressive patronymic: J.
reproduces St.'s learned nomenclature throughout her translation).

The alliteration supporting this rhythm is obvious; it is in fact the
most evident of J.'s poetic techniques. The overall effect is quite
compelling. For instance, an address to Jupiter (3.471-4): "for You,
tradition tells us, freight / flickering wings with wisdom, fill birds
brimful with Your / forecasts, send omens down from the sky, disclose
causes / deep-seated". But often J. seems to seek out alliteration at
the expense of good translation. Thus for per inane uolatus, she writes
"swooping, sweeping space with his wings" (1.310); for lucidus Euhan,
"bright Bacchus" (5.675); and for inuida fata piis et fors ingentibus
ausis / rara comes, "Fate envies the righteous, and Fortune but rarely
favors / the brave" (10.384-5; see also below, on J.'s allusions to
well-known English phrases).

Another striking feature of this translation is its formatting.
Adopting the same scheme as her translation of Lucan, J. uses "outsized
initials and stanzaic breaks" (xxxv) to mark the structure of the poem,
and italicizes and indents passages where St. makes authorial asides.
These techniques are effective and helpful. Less so are the broken
lines with which she represents ekphraseis; I find these awkward at
best, and jarring at worst (12.675-6 is a particularly disruptive
example). Readers' taste will vary on this point.

Finally, J.'s modern idiom occasionally feels too modern. Particularly
problematic are "Saint Opheltes" (4.722, sacrum Ophelten), "Mars
Bringer of War" (3.422, deus armifer), "shocks and awes" (1.289,
reverentia obstat), "what they've skyjacked" (3.509, altis...rapinis),
and "off their own bat" (7.125, ultro!). Again, readers' taste will
vary.

Having dispensed with these few and minor criticisms, I conclude with
three excerpts from J.'s verse, the many virtues (and minor flaws) of
which should be evident. I include for comparison Shackleton Bailey's
prose translation from the Loeb series (2003) and Melville's blank
verse version (Oxford, 1992; Ross' new blank verse translation
(Baltimore, 2004) does not improve on Melville, in my opinion).

First, the speech of an anonymous shade in the underworld, who
addresses Laius as he follows Mercury up to Thebes. Here J.'s earthy
tone is perfect for the sarcastic rhetoric--better than the more
melancholy versions of Shackleton Bailey and Melville. Note especially
the sly line-break "mad High / Priestess" (but maior Erinys means "a
greater Fury [sc. than Jove]", not "the senior Fury").

2.19-25
'uade' ait 'o felix, quoscumque uocaris in usus,
seu Iouis imperio, seu maior adegit Erinys
ire diem contra, seu te furiata sacerdos
Thessalis arcano iubet emigrare sepulcro,
heu dulces uisure polos solemque relictum
et uirides terras et puros fontibus amnes,
tristior has iterum tamen intrature tenebras.'

Shackleton Bailey

'Go,' he cries, 'happy one, for whatever uses you are summoned--whether
Jove's command or a greater Fury has forced you to face the daylight or
a Thessalian priestess in frenzy bids you leave your secret tomb, you
shall see the sweet sky, alas, and the sun you left behind and the
green earth and the pure founts of rivers; yet the sadder shall you
enter this gloom a second time.'

Melville
'Go, lucky soul, whatever purpose summons,
Whether Jove's edict calls to face the day
Or mightier Furies drive, or frenzied witch
Of Thessaly commands you to forsake
Your secret sepulchre. You'll see, alas,
The sweet and lovely sky, the sun you left,
The lush green land, the crystal-springing streams;
Yet with a sadder heart you'll come again,
Re-entering this sombre world of dark.'

Joyce
"So long! Lucky you--no matter what uses
you're called for, whether you're sent to face the day by Jove's
command or the senior Fury's, or whether a mad High
Priestess of Thessaly bids you slip out of your sealed sepulcher...
Too bad! though you'll see sweet sky, the sun you once knew,
vivid green fields, and rivers of pure spring water, you'll be
that much more glum when you're dragged back down to this gloom."

The second excerpt shows J.'s treatment of a battle scene, which is
quite sensitive to the effects of St.'s Latin: she keeps Iacchus,
inserts a very effective line break (marked by "//"), matches the
enjambment of excutit with her own ("out of his grip"), and underscores
the dark humour of the final line.

8.491-6
tunc flauum Hypanin flauumque Politen
(ille genas Phoebo, crinem hic pascebat Iaccho:
saeuus uterque deus), uictis Hyperenora iungit
conuersumque fuga Damasum; sed lapsa per armos
hasta uiri trans pectus abit parmamque tenenti
excutit et summa fugiens in cuspide portat.

Shackleton Bailey

Then for blond Hypanis and blond Polites--the one keeping his beard for
Phoebus, the other his hair for Bacchus, but both gods were unkind. To
the vanquished he joins Hyperenor and Damasus, who had turned to flee;
but the spear, slipping through his shoulders, runs out through his
chest and shakes the shield from his grasp, carrying it on the point in
flight.

Melville
Fair-haired Hypanis,
Fair-haired Polites, both he slew; one grew
His hair for Bacchus, one his beard for Phoebus--
Both gods were cruel. Hyperenor too
He added to his dead and Damasus
Who turned to flee, but through his shoulder shot
The spear and, traversing his chest, dislodged
The buckler from his grasp and flying on
Carried it on its point.

Joyce
Haemon next slew Hypanis (blond) and Polite^s (blond):
one grew his beard for Phoebus, one his hair for Iacchus.
Both Gods were cruel. //
Hyperenor he joined to his victims, also
Damasus, who'd turned to flee when the hero's spear, stabbing
between his shoulders, came out through his chest, struck the buckler
out of his grip: on flew the spear, his shield pinned to its nose!

Finally, St. in a more lyrical mood. Here the loftier tone of
Shackleton Bailey and Melville is perhaps more effective than J.'s
rendering. Further, I suspect that simplex became "foolish" (rather
than "simple") for the sake of alliteration with "field", and
ipsisque...Thebis surely refers to ibat...sanguis (not
prensis...negant). But J.'s last line is moving: the best of the three
translations, and probably the best of any possible rendering.

9.877-83
at puer infusus sociis in deuia campi
tollitur (heu simplex aetas!) moriensque iacentem
flebat equum; cecidit laxata casside uultus,
aegraque per trepidos expirat gratia uisus,
et prensis concussa comis ter colla quaterque
stare negant, ipsisque nefas lacrimabile Thebis,
ibat purpureus niueo de pectore sanguis.

Shackleton Bailey

But the boy collapsed upon his comrades is borne to a sequestered part
of the field. Alas for the simplicity of youth! Dying, he wept for his
prostrate horse! Unloosed his helmet, his face sank and in his
flickering eyes sick beauty fails. Three times and four they seize his
hair and shake his neck that will not stay upright; and (a sacrilege to
draw tears from Thebes herself) blood coursed purple from his snowy
breast.

Melville
In his friends' arms far from the battlefield
The lad was borne--alas, those simple years!--
And dying he bewailed his fallen steed.
Freed of its helmet, his head drooped, his eyes
Swam and his grace, sore wounded, breathed away.
Three times they grasped his hair and shook his head
But it sank back again and crimson blood--
A wickedness to make even Thebans weep--
Over his death-white breast was flowing down.

Joyce
But the boy, sprawled limp, was borne by his comrades off to a far
part of the field where (ah, foolish youth!), dying, he wept for
his downed horse. They loosened his helm and his head fell forward,
his beauty now ailing, the spark in his eyes expiring.
Though they seized his hair and shook him three times, four times,
his neck would not stiffen--an evil grievous even
to Thebes! Blood made its crimson way down his snow-white breast.

English readers of the Th. once had to rely on Mozley's problematic
Loeb translation. Statians now are faced with a somewhat unfamiliar
situation: choice. We now have two prose versions (Shackleton Bailey
and Hall (Newcastle, 2007)) and two blank verse translations (Melville
and Ross), not to mention versions in other languages.[[4]] Readers
will choose the language and form of translation according to their
tastes and linguistic talents; for those choosing English verse, J.'s
will be an attractive option. The vigorous, engaging translation,
copious supporting material, and confident interpretive voice will
appeal to student and scholar, devoted Statian or relative newcomer.
Her work rewards casual reading or more intense study. An impressive
achievement that will be hard to match, it deserves to become the new
standard.

I append a few brief notes on the commentary, followed by a list of
typos and formatting errors (rather a lot in a book whose quality is
otherwise quite high).

1.692-3: it should be specified that the seasonal rising and setting of
Arcturus are associated with storms.

2.108-14: Harmonia's necklace is a gift from Polynices to Argia, not
part of the Argive dowry (cf. 2.265).

4.24-31: 2.193 ff. is not a Ship of State simile, but refers primarily
to Polynices and Tydeus.

4.626-8: Laius is not referring to his epiphany in book 2, but to the
current necromancy and his memory of his murder by Oedipus.

4.786-7: add pp. 95-115 in Pache, C. O. Baby and child heroes in
ancient Greece. Urbana, 2004.

6.95-6: a supporting reference would have been welcome.

6.296-923: add Lovatt, H. Statius and epic games: sport, politics and
poetics in the Thebaid. Cambridge, 2005.

10.518: Shackleton Bailey is surely right. The deaths of Ormenus and
Amyntor elaborate on 513-14, the first accounting for hoste retento,
the second for exclusere suos; furthermore, Amyntor's begging (515-16)
fits best with a defender suddenly caught outside his walls.

11.509-16: reference to 7.632 ff. would have been welcome.

v (Dedication): should be "optimis parentibus".

xi n. 2: Suetonius reference should be specified.

xii: "Stygian", not "Stydian".

xxiii: in "his father('s)", the apostrophe has become an opening single
quotation mark (and an opening quotation mark has become a closing one
at 8.111, 9.901, and n. on 12.581-2).

xxiv: "c.e." should be in small caps.

fn. on 1.597: Poine^, not Porne^!

3.399: "then", not "than" (also at 6.860).

4.8: should be "Aonian".

6.358: should be "as if".

7.9: should be "Ocean".

7.82: an en has replaced an em dash.

p. 179: the line number 125 should be moved up one line.

7.705-8: should probably be italicized.

9.712: should be "gentle".

9.719: should be "Maenalian".

10.813: should be "swallowed".

p. 320: "Statius", not "satatius".

12.103: space between "rise" and "by".

n. on 4.746-52: "Hypsipyle^" (a macron has supplanted a circumflex
accent).

n. on 4.786-7: remove period after the second "Archemorus".

n. on 5.431-44: the second "Calai+s" is missing a diaeresis.

n. on 5.609: no space between "Statius" and "-Poet".

n. on 6.934-7: should be a single word, "[t]here".

n. 7.792-3: "St. Elmo's fire", not "Statius Elmo's fire"!

n. on 9.293-301: should be "clementia".

n. on 9.319-31: should be "Crenaeus", not "Croesus".

n. on 10.646-9: "Omphale^" has been twice misspelled.

n. 12.499-505: capitalize "Hercules".

n. on 12.814: a rogue square bracket before "is magnanimus".

p. 499: Papinii is misspelled in the title of Klotz-Klinnert (1973),
Seneca in the title of Lawall (1983).


------------------
Notes:


1.  W. Lillington Lewis (Oxford, 1767) used heroic couplets, A. D.
Melville (Oxford, 1992) and C. S. Ross (Baltimore, 2004) blank verse,
J. B. Poynton (Oxford: The Shakespeare Head Press, 1971) the Spenserian
stanza.

2.  The English epic and its background. Oxford, 1954.

3.  Line numbers refer to J.'s translation, but are usually identical
with the Latin, which I take from D. E. Hill's edition (Leiden 1983).

4.  E.g., Lesueur (Paris, 1990), Traglia-Arico\ (Turin, 1980),
Schoenberger (Wuerzburg, 1998), and Rupprecht (Mitterfels, 2000).