Ut pictura poesis: Visual rhetoric in Homeric controversy of the early 18th century
https://doi.org/10.22394/2412-9410-2023-9-4-70-93
Abstract
During 1714–1716, a stormy, if short-lived, polemic broke out in France over Homer and his place in the literary canon. Its participants debated how his works should be assessed and how they should be translated, verbatim or freely. Homer’s opponents, led by Houdar de La Motte, pointed to the immorality of Homeric heroes, their stubbornness and cruelty; they also dwelled on the compositional flaws of his poems, showing their incompatibility with modern aesthetic standards. For their part supporters of the ancient poet, led by Madame Dacier, insisted on the historical and cultural distance which separated the works of Homer from modernity, and argued that they could not be evaluated according to the standards of another era. In this exchange of opinions, both sides used the same topoi and figures of speech because they were engaged in public controversy and therefore competed in rhetoric. The article considers one such topos, which equates Homer with an artist — a sculptor or a painter — and treats his writings as sculptures or paintings. This equation represents an interesting twist on the traditional saying ‘ut pictura poesis’, and is used by both parties, but for different purposes and with varying rhetorical effectiveness.
Supporting agencies: The article was written on the basis of the RANEPA state assignment research programme.
About the Author
M. S. Neklyudova
The Russian Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Maria S. Neklyudova, PhD, Head of the Centre for Studies in History and Culture, School for Advanced Studies in the Humanities, Institute for Social Sciences
119571, Moscow, Prospekt Vernadskogo, 82
Tel.: +7 (499) 956-96-48
References
1. Barkan, L. (1999). Unearthing the past: Archaeology and aesthetics in the making of Renaissance culture. Yale Univ. Press.
2. Cammagre, G. (2010). De l’avenir des Anciens. La polémique sur Homère entre Mme Dacier et Houdar de La Motte. Littératures classiques, 72(2), 145–156. (In French).
3. Chevrel, Y., Cointre, A., & Tran-Gervat, Y.-M. (Eds.). (2014). Histoire des traductions en langue française. XVIIe et XVIIe siècles: 1610–1815. Verdier. (In French).
4. Faniez, A. de (1885). Notice sur le R. P. Cléric, jésuite. Bulletin de Société archéologique, scientifique et littéraire de Béziers. Deuxième série, 13, 65–82. (In French).
5. Fumaroli, M. (1986). Rhétorique d’école et rhétorique adulte: Remarques sur la réception européenne du traité ‘Du Sublime’ au XVIe et au XVIIe siècle. Revue d’Histoire Littéraire de La France, 86(1), 33–51. (In French).
6. Fumaroli, M. (2013). Le sablier renversé. Des Modernes aux Anciens. Gallimard. (In French).
7. Graziani, Fr. (2009). L’art de comparer. Dix-septième siècle, 245(4), 585–591. (In French).
8. Green, L. D., & Murphy, J. J. (2006). Renaissance rhetoric: Short title catalogue 1460–1700 (2nd ed.). Ashgate.
9. Hayes, J. C. (2009). Translation, subjectivity, and culture in France and England, 1600–1800. Stanford Univ. Press.
10. Hepp, N. (1969). Homère en France au XVIIe siècle. Klincksieck. (In French).
11. Hirst, M., & Dunkerton, J. (1994). Making and meaning: The Young Michelangelo. The artist in Rome, 1496–1501. The National. Gallery.
12. Lecoq, A. M. (Ed.) (2001). La Querelle des Anciens et des Modernes, XVIIe–XVIIIe siècles. Gallimard. (In French).
13. Lee, R. W. (1967). Ut Pictura Poesis: The humanistic theory of painting. W. W. Norton & Co., Inc.
14. Norman, L. F. (2011). The shock of the ancient: Literature & history in early modern France. Univ. of Chicago Press.
15. Palagia, O. (1980). Euphranor. Brill.
16. Prioux, Év. (2021). Rivaliser avec les “tableaux” d’Homère: les références à l’εἰδωλοποιία de l’Iliade dans les Images de Philostrate l’Ancien. Aitia, 11(2). http://journals.openedition.org/aitia/8685. https://doi.org/10.4000/aitia.8685. (In French).
17. Reitsam, D. D. (2021). La Querelle d’Homère dans la presse des Lumières: L’exemple du Nouveau Mercure galant. Narr Francke Attempto. (In French).
18. Simonsuuri, K. (1979). Homer’s original genius: Eighteenth-century notions of the early Greek epic (1688–1798). Cambridge Univ. Press.
19. Thirouin, L. (2007). L’aveuglement salutaire. Le réquisitoire contre le théâtre dans la France classique. Honoré Champion. (In French).
20. Webb, R. (1999). Ekphrasis ancient and modern: The invention of a genre. Word & Image, 15(1), 7–18.
21. Wind, E. (1958). Pagan mysteries in the Renaissance. Yale Univ. Press.
Review
For citations:
Neklyudova M.S. Ut pictura poesis: Visual rhetoric in Homeric controversy of the early 18th century. Shagi / Steps. 2023;9(4):70-93. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22394/2412-9410-2023-9-4-70-93
Views:
56
Email this article 