21. Richard Hunter - Studies in Heliodorus (Cambridge Classical Journal Supplements, Book 21) (1998) [Retail].pdf

(19285 KB) Pobierz
Supplementary Volume no. 21
STUDIES IN HELIODORUS
EDITED BY
RICHARD HUNTER
THE CAM BRIDG E PH ILOLOGICAL SOCIETY
1998
CONTENTS
page
iv
v
Preface
List of Contributors
I
Narrative technique
1.
PHOENICIAN GAMES IN HELIODORUS’
AITHIOPIKA
Ewen Bowie
A READING OF HELIODORUS,
AITHIOPIKA
3.4.1 - 3.5.2
Philip Hardie
THE
AITHIOPIKA
OF HELIODORUS: BEYOND
INTERPRETATION?
Richard Hunter
NARRATIVE DOUBLETS IN HELIODORUS’
AITHIOPIKA
J.R. Morgan
1
2.
19
3.
40
4.
60
II
The construction o f culture
1.
AN ETHIOPIAN PARADOX: HELIODORUS,
AITHIOPIKA
4.8
John Hilton
THE BIRTH OF A PRODIGY: HELIODORUS AND THE
GENEALOGY OF HELLENISM
Tim Whitmarsh
79
2.
93
III
Reception
1.
NARRATIVE, RHETORIC, AND ‘DRAMA’ REDISCOVERED:
SCHOLARS AND POETS IN BYZANTIUM INTERPRET
HELIODORUS
Panagiotis A. Agapitos
HELIODORUS PARTHENOPAEUS: THE
AITHIOPIKA
IN
BAROQUE NAPLES
Clotilde Bertoni and Massimo Fusillo
AITHIOPIKA
AND ETHIOPIANISM
Daniel L. Selden
125
2.
157
3.
182
BIBLIOGRAPHY
219
PREFACE
Few ancient texts have the irritant power of the
Aithiopika:
this remarkable romance
gets under your skin (quite literally, of course) until you end up worrying about little
else.1 This power to both irritate and fascinate says, of course, much about modem,
western concerns: if the
Aithiopika
did not exist, then we (or Umberto Eco) should
certainly have had to invent it. A late-antique fictional narrative of cultural interchange,
religion and gender, which is almost obsessively self-reflexive in its techniques and
literary appropriations (cf. the papers of Bowie, Hardie and Morgan), might seem itself
to be an extravagant fiction, sent from heaven to be the plaything of late twentieth-
century scholars. As some of the papers in this collection demonstrate, however, it is
not merely our age which has been provoked by the Heliodoran pageant.
Different ages have in fact emphasized quite disparate elements of the
Aithiopika:
paradox and inversion are central to the response embodied in this collection. Paradox
shows itself most crucially perhaps not in the jagged juxtapositions and simultaneities
which the
Aithiopika
shares with all the Greek novels, or even in the central ‘fact’ of
Charikleia’s remarkable skin-colour (cf. John Hilton’s paper), but more in the uncanny
coexistence of a very strong sense of specificity in time and culture (we can almost
smell a
Zeitgeist,
even if the academic community cannot agree when that
Zeit
was)
and a free-floating timelessness which exploits and displays all times, rather as the
literary texture of the work devours and displays the whole generic heritage (cf. the
papers of Agapitos, Hunter and Bertoni-Fusillo). What constitutes this paradox is not
the dislocations and ‘anachronisms’ produced by a ‘historical setting’ many centuries
before the romance was actually written, but the double focus of a tale which, on the
one hand, is a foundational and normative narrative of religion and morality and, on
the other, offers itself as the culmination of a very long process, passing in review -
as if to confirm its ‘final’ status - all that has led, socially and culturally, to this
telos
(cf. Tim Whitmarsh’s paper). As for inversion, the
Aithiopika’s
oblique deconstruction
of some of the most deeply ingrained racial and social stereotypes of classical Greek
literature and culture (cf. Daniel Selden’s paper) gives it a political importance which
classicists would be (at least) misguided to ignore, let alone try to conceal.
With one exception, the essays gathered here first saw the light of day as papers delivered
to a Cambridge ‘Laurence Seminar’ on Heliodorus in May 1996, and it is hoped that some
of the communal θαύμα and εποχή of that seminar - the sense that Heliodorus is still
winning by a very comfortable margin - has survived the transition to writing. It is a pleasure
to thank the Faculty of Classics for its generosity in making the seminar possible and for
its willingness to join the Cambridge Philological Society in supporting the publication of
these papers. My thanks also to Mary Whitby for her careful and alert sub-editing.
RLH
1. An itch well described by Anne Carson,
Eros the bittersweet
(Princeton 1986) 92-5.

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika:

Zgłoś jeśli naruszono regulamin