Life and literature in the Roman republicFrank, Tenney
History
Life and literature in the Roman republic
Frank, Tenney
Latin literature -- History and criticism; Rome -- Intellectual life
In the _Hecyra_, the second play of Terence, there is no preparation,
and the delay in relieving the tension of the spectator is carried to
extreme lengths. The old story of a maiden violated at the festival
during a dark night provides the entanglement. In the end the guilty
father of her child turns out to be the very man she has married.
Even through the Latin text one can see that the early scenes of the
original[12] presupposed an informed audience enjoying the delusions of
characters working on mistaken suppositions. But Terence blotted out the
information by deleting the prologue of the original. The semi-expository
first act gives the immediate situation but reserves the key-fact for
line 829 near the end of the play. If that fact—that the unknown violator
was Pamphilus, the husband—had been revealed to the spectators at the
beginning they might have enjoyed the dramatic irony of the scene (II,
1) in which Laches scolds his wife for imagined wrongs, and especially
the incongruity of Pamphilus’ oath, by all that is sacred, that he is
not to blame for the separation (line 476). Terence has done a very
daring thing here in keeping the audience in doubt and in anxiety. He
has assumed that the audience will patiently bear in mind these puzzling
quarrels and asseverations and watch the mysteries accumulating without
any key to the solution for several hundred lines. A modern, used to
that kind of thing in detective stories, finds it less difficult to
do, but our students usually have to read the _Hecyra_ with unusually
alert attention, and it is certain that they would miss much of the
delicate play if they were to see it hurriedly acted on the stage without
previous preparation. In fact, Terence commits the sin of hinting at
incorrect solutions. Pamphilus (at line 260) learns of the child and only
betrays bewilderment, which is apt to mislead the spectator; at line
517 Pamphilus’ father also learns of the child but draws an incorrect
conclusion, giving a new starting point for a possible erroneous guess;
at line 577 his mother, half-informed, imagines that her son has deserted
his wife for ugly reasons. Only at line 827 does the resolution of the
intrigue take place. There is not one ancient play before the day of
Terence, so far as we know, where an audience was left in such complete
suspense before an accumulating mass of perplexities; and this was
an audience, it will be remembered, accustomed to be taken into the
confidence of the prologue. It is not surprising, therefore, that this
play—one of the most human in the classical repertoire—failed twice,
and that the spectators rushed away from it to see a boxing match. But
Terence apparently was proud of what he had done and insisted that the
play have its chance. Only after he had established his reputation by the
success of the _Eunuchus_ was it at last played with success.
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