What is it: the poet as virtuous moderate.
----
Why 4 stars: in a letter written to an aspiring poet/playwright, Horace provides us a characteristically frank description of his own poetry: "My aim is to take familiar things and make / Poetry of them [...] such is the power of making / A perfectly wonderful thing out of nothing much." Horace's epistles, all written (and here translated) as poems, are a kind of poetry not typically associated with classical writing. We think of ancient poetry and think of Homer and Virgil, or of Horace's Odes perhaps. Grandeur, scale, intricacy, allusion. These letters, though, are simpler, grounded, even plain at times. Horace speaks of everyday experiences--his and those he expects are understood by or shared by the various recipients of his letters; he is frequently funny, making biting remarks about some politician or orator or satirizing some party or social function; he remarks about money--the having of it, by the generosity of his patron, and the lack of it, should he return to poverty--and about etiquette, prudence, teaching, etc.
Above all, however, Horace spends these letters offering moral instruction. Sure, this instruction is couched within self-deprecation about his own laziness or health, or draped with instruction about writing and social norms, even framed by fiscal advice or comments about rural life vs. urban life. But, whatever the ostensible context of each letter, Horace takes every opportunity to provide some fundamental, underlying comment on virtue. These letters, as Horace himself compiled them for publication, comprise a sort of counter-education in an era of Roman society that Horace feared was increasingly caught up in unconsidered extremes.
The center of virtue, for Horace, is moderation. The middle-ground. He critiques men swept up in awe as much as he critiques men crushed by fear. He critiques careless reveling in wealth as much as he critiques blithe acceptance of poverty. He hates the crowds and expectations of the city as much as he struggles with the isolation and lack of culture in the countryside. He seeks, and advocates others seek, a way of life that permits them balance in their emotions, balance in their circumstances, balance in their relationships and interactions.
It is crucial, then, that when he describes the work of writing poetry, his own work, his own participation in the moral activity of Roman society, Horace emphasizes that poetry's power is moving the familiar into the realm of the wonderful. Nothing much becomes something significant in the hands of a poet. This is itself a kind of moderation. A kind of middle-ground. That the baseness of the world should not be left base but elevated. But equally that the grandeur of language should not be reserved only for aloof heroes and mythic monsters. The meeting of grand language with everyday life is a virtue uniquely found in the poetic work.
This matching of poetry and virtue is demonstrated in Horace's own self-evaluation. He self-deprecates often. He diminishes his circumstances. He keeps himself bowed before those he respects. He presents himself, in a word, as humble. Yet he does so in carefully crafted poetic form. He gives to his own humility the gift of beautiful verse, an elevating of his own baseness.
So I can't shake this feeling, persistent when reading these letters, that maybe Horace's humility isn't so humble as he presents. I'm trained, I suppose, to distrust Roman writers. Because language to a Roman, especially a notable public figure, was understood to be performative. Of course all language is always performative, but we often forget that, or trust that many of us simply want to perform what we actually feel or who we actually are. Roman writers and orators, however, have reason to foreground the performance. The craft of language was the skill that earned them authority and influence. The performance was the power of it.
And in Horace's letters, I see signs too that for all he cares about moral education and proper virtues for Roman culture, these virtues, those morals, are equally foregrounded as performative. The context for Horace's moral instruction is always the context of social function--how one's behaviors and attitudes are perceived by, evaluated by, affect or are affected by, the people one interacts with. Moderation is not presented as a philosophical ideal. It is a socially useful ideal. The middle-ground, the temperance, the line between extremes, is a powerful position in a society increasingly polarized or dynamic. Horace sees this, advocates for it, and models it.
The humility of both his poetry and his life strikes me as more often than not a scheme devised to position Horace in a niche among his peers and patrons that he feels grants him respect from others and influence among them.
Within the same verses I quoted at the start, Horace includes in his description of his own poetry this too: "[...] and do it in such a way / That it looks as if it was easy as could be / For anybody to do it (although he'd sweat / And strain and work his head off, all in vain). / Such is the power of judgment, of knowing what / It means to put the elements together / In just the right way."
Poetry and virtue, both demonstrations of the power of judgment, of putting things together in the right way for others to witness and evaluate.
Yet even in all this performance, there are the briefest moments where what seems to me to be a more vulnerable Horace is visible. Glimpses of emotion not checked as much as perhaps he would have wished to. Glimpses of frustrations about his own character deeper than his usual self-deprecation. It is those moments that strike me as the most compelling reminders the poet cannot exist only in the world of performance. Language cannot be held always at arms-length. Even Horace, skillful as he certainly is, could not help but sometimes, briefly and rarely, speak his mind and his heart.
----
On the translation: I remain David Ferry's biggest fan. I have found no better modern translator of Latin, and specifically this era of Latin--Virgil and Horace both writing in Augustus' peace. I appreciate that this edition includes the original Latin beside the translation, because there's so many turns of phrase, so many moments of voice and tone, that require a kind of dance between languages. It is so easy to see Latin as inherently more formal than English, but Ferry's gift is recognizing that Latin is just as capable of several modes and moods, albeit with maybe subtler clues hidden in the grammar and syntax.
The testament to Ferry's skill in translating Horace, I think, is in recognizing those moments when Horace breaks from his performative poetry to speak genuinely of himself. It would be easy to translate these letters in a single voice that overwhelmed the dynamics of when Horace is speaking as a public figure and when as a private individual, but Ferry preserves those dynamics in his English text, leveraging English's meter and diction to accomplish what Latin's grammar accomplished.
----
You might also like: Cicero's essays. While writing a generation before poets like Horace and Virgil, and writing not poetry but essays on politics and society, Cicero shares Horace's foregrounding of performance. Takes it much further than Horace, in fact.