A history of criticism and literary taste in Europe, from the earliest texts to the present day. Volume 1 (of 3), Classical and mediæval criticismSaintsbury, George
History
A history of criticism and literary taste in Europe, from the earliest texts to the present day. Volume 1 (of 3), Classical and mediæval criticism
Saintsbury, George
Criticism -- History; Literature -- History and criticism; Literature, Medieval
The two more certain works, on the other hand, belong only to those
outskirts of our subject which have been so often characterised. The
_Questions_[75] busy themselves almost wholly with the text and the
meaning, though it is fair to say that Porphyry is much above the usual
scholiast in sense and judgment, and sometimes approaches criticism
proper. This approach, however, is generally, if not always, displayed
in the same direction as that of Aristotle’s extant _Homeric Problems_
(_v. supra_, p. 49 _sq._) and of many of the remarks made by the Master
in the twenty-fifth chapter of the _Poetics_—the direction, namely, of
solving material _aporiæ_, such as Aristotle’s own comment on ζωρότερον
κέραιε, and Porphyry’s[76] on the demurrer why Penelope did not send
Telemachus for aid to her own parents? The process, in short,
illustrates frequently, if not always, that curious _swerving_ from the
purely literary question which we so often notice. Almost any magnet is
strong enough to draw the commentator away from that question. He will
even ask, and gravely answer, the question, Why men, but not gods, are
represented as washing their hands before dinner?
Footnote 75:
Ed. Schrader, 2 vols., Leipsic, 1890.
Footnote 76:
For this and the subsequent oddity see Schrader (_op. cit._, _Ad
Odysseam_), pp. 40-43. The subject is dealt with, from another point
of view, in a monograph by M. Carroll, _Aristotle’s Poetics in the
Light of the Homeric Scholia_, Baltimore, 1895.
The _De Antro Nympharum_,[77] on the other hand, is the principal
example, in intermediate times, of that allegorical interpretation or
misinterpretation which, unless kept severely in order, is sure to usurp
the place of the criticism to which it can at best be ancillary. From no
other members of the school, so far as I know, have we anything that
comes even as near to criticism as this.
Footnote 77:
My copy of this is the separate edition of Van Goens (Trajecti ad
Rhenum, 1765). It can hardly be necessary to say that the subject is
the famous and beautiful opening of _Od._ xiii. As for the
treatment—the cave, the double entrance, the nymphs, the vases, the
bees, are all allegorised to the _n_^{th}, pressed to death, broken on
the wheel, sublimated to a non-essence in the Neo-Platonic laboratory.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account