MOSAQUE,revuedesjeuneschercheursenSHSLilleNorddeFranceBelgiquefrancophone1,juin2009

1

NicolasWIATER

TragediestoLaughatLucianontheFailuresofMimesis

Noticebiographique

NicolasWiaterisalecturer(wissenschaftlicherMitarbeiter)inClassicsatBonnUniversity.He

wrote his Ph.D on The Ideology ofClassicism. Language,History, and Identity inDionysius of

Halicarnassus andhaspublished articlesonGreek IntellectualCulture andhistoriographyof the

HellenisticandEarlyImperialTimes.

Rsums

CetarticleexaminelesconceptionsdelatragdiechezLucien,entrephilosophie,thtreet

rhtorique. Lide selon laquelle la vie est une forme de tragdie que nous jouons sur terre est

insparablede la conception rhtoriquede lamimsis,quiexigede celuiquiprend laparolequil

imitelesgrandsorateursetlesacteursdelhistoirepasse.lpoquedeLucien,cetterecherchede

limitationnese limitaitpasauxorateursmaisconcernaitaussi lesphilosophes.Llmentprincipal

autourduquelsarticulelacritiquedeLucienestquecesderniersprtendenttrelessuccesseursdes

philosophesclassiquesetqueladfinitionquilsdonnentdeuxmmesreposesurcetteprtentionet

leurmasquesocial,pluttquesurdesralisationsintellectuelles.Laconceptiondutragiquechez

Lucienapourbutdervlercefossentrelespersonnesrellesetleurstentativespoursemettreen

scnecommelesgrandsphilosophesdupass.UndesobjectifsprincipauxdestextesdeLucienestde

mettrefincettetragdie(involontaire)endmasquantlesprtensionsinfondesdecesacteurseten

tournantcestragdiesdelautofabricationdesoiencomdiesdelchecdelamimsis.

My paper examines Lucians conception of tragedy between philosophy, drama, and

rhetoric.Theideaoflifeasatragedywhichweareenactingonearthisinseparablefromtherhetorical

conception ofmimesiswhich requires the speaker to impersonate the great orators and historical

actorsofthepast.InLucianstimes,thismimeticdesirewasnotlimitedtooratorsbutalsoincluded

philosophers.Luciansmainpointofcriticismisthatthelatterpretendtobesuccessorsoftheclassical

MOSAQUE,revuedesjeuneschercheursenSHSLilleNorddeFranceBelgiquefrancophone1,juin2009

2

forebearsandthattheirselfdefinitionisbasedonthesepretensions,theirsocialmasks,ratherthanon

intellectualachievement.Luciansconceptionofthetragicisaimedatrevealingthisgapbetween

theactualpersonandtheirattemptstostagethemselvesasthegreatphilosophersofthepast.Oneof

themajoraimsofLucians texts is to end this (involuntary) tragedybyunmasking theunfounded

pretensionsofitsactorsandturningthesetragediesofselffashioningintocomediesoffailedmimesis.

Motscls:Lucien,mimsis,philosophie,rhtorique,tragdie,comdie.

Keywords:Lucian,mimesis,philosophy,rhetoric,tragedy,comedy.

Sommaire

Introduction:TragedyandComedy.................................................................................................................21.MimesisMisunderstood:LuciansConceptionofTragedy........................................................................42.TurningtheReaderintoSpectators:LuciansUseofComedy...............................................................153.ReFashioningTradition:LuciansConstructiveLaughter.....................................................................20Bibliography.......................................................................................................................................................24

Introduction:TragedyandComedy

The relationship between the comic and the tragic and especially between its

exemplarymanifestationsinliterature,tragedyandcomedy,ishardtodefine.Comparisons

are deceptive, but in someways tragedy and comedy resemble nonidentical twins: the

observercanhardlydenyastrangesimilaritybetweenthetwo,andtheoneinevitablyseems

tocalltomindtheother;butatthesametime,thesesimilaritiesareconstantlyontheverge

ofbeingdissolvedbyanequallystrongimpressionofdistinctnesswhichleavestheobserver

withanambiguousmixtureofdoubtandcertainty.In thesameway,comedyand tragedy

belong togetherwhileat the same timebeing totally separate,and they complement each

otherasmuchastheyareopposites1.

1Ontheintersectionsoftragedyandcomedysee,e.g.,SEIDENSTICKER1982;TAPLIN2003.

MOSAQUE,revuedesjeuneschercheursenSHSLilleNorddeFranceBelgiquefrancophone1,juin2009

3

Thisambiguitywasfeltalreadyinantiquity.InPlatosPhilebus,forexample,Socrates

points to the paradoxical nature of the spectators experience during a performance of a

tragedy or a comedy: spectators of a tragedy, Socrates says at 48a 56, enjoy crying

( ); a comedy, by contrast, provokes laughter at other peoples

misconceptionsofthemselvesortheirabilities,theirofthemselves: lifedepicted in

comedy is lifewhich is contrary to the famousDelphicmaxim of ,which

Socrateshimselfhasadoptedasthestandardofhisownlife.Yet,bydefinition,laughingat

otherpeoplesmishapsismaliceorillwill,theGreektermforwhichis,and

harms the soul, it is a .Therefore as tears and joy, and , are

mixed in tragedy, laughter and harm, and , arepaired in comedy.Themost

famous passage, however,which deals albeit briefly with the strange relationship of

comedyandtragedyisthelastsceneofPlatosSymposium:whileallotherguestsarealready

firmly asleep, Socrates, the philosopher, is arguingwith the tragedianAgathon and the

comedianAristophanes,forcingthemtoagreethatitispossibleforoneandthesameman

toknowhowtocreatecomedyandtragedy,andthatthemanwhohastheskillofatragic

poetisalsoacomicpoet([]

,

,223d362).

This statementofSocrates shows thatPlatowasawareofadeepaffinitybetween

both typesofdrama,buthisdeclarationofsuchanaffinitywasatoddswiththehistorical

realityofhistimes:Platosphrasing,thatSocrateshastoforceAgathonandAristophanes

toagreewithhim,remindsusofthefactthatapoetwhocombinedcomicandtragicskills

didnotexisteitherinthefifthorinthefourthcenturyBCE:ForthefifthcenturyAthenian,

tragedy was tragedy, and comedy comedy, and never the twain should meet thus

BernardKnoxsasfamousasdecisivestatement,whichis,paradoxicallyenough,confirmed

bythesameSocratesinthePoliteia.Everyindividual,Socratesstatesat395a16,candoonly

one thingwell. Therefore, the same persons cannot performwell two different acts of

2 On Platos conception of tragedy and the tragic in general see HALLIWELL 2003; HALLIWELL 1984;HALLIWELL 1982;KUHN 1941;KUHN 1942; on tragedy and comedy in the Symposiums specifically seePATTERSON1982;KUHN1941,p.12(onSymp.223d).

MOSAQUE,revuedesjeuneschercheursenSHSLilleNorddeFranceBelgiquefrancophone1,juin2009

4

mimesis [], even if these seem to be very closely related to each other [

],suchascomedyandtragedy3.

Iwillargue in thispaper thataproperappreciationof the functionofhumourand

laughter, in short: of the comic, in Lucians uvre depends on our understanding of

Luciansconceptionoftragedy.ToLucian,itwillturnout,thetermtragedywasnot

confined anymore to classicalAttic drama as itwas presented at the feast of theGreat

Dionysia.Tobesure,heusesthisterminthissensetoo,butwhatinterestsushereisrathera

metaphoricaluseoftheword4.InthefirstsectionofmypaperIwillshowthatLucianuses

tragedyasametaphorforamistakenconceptionofmimesis.Thiskindofmimesisrisksto

reduce the culture of the past to a shallowmask and thus to strip it of itsmeaning, its

authorityanditsvalue.

As Iwill argue in the second section, the satiric and comic inLuciansworksde

maskstheshallowattitudeofhiscontemporariesbyrepresentingitinanexaggerated,even

grotesque,mannerand,thus,laysbaretheirfaultsandtheconsequencesfortheroleofthe

GreekintheRomanpresentwhichtheyimply.Lucianstextsturnhisreadersintospectators

oftheircontemporariesridiculoustragediesandthusactasacorrectivewhichmakestrue

continuitywiththegreatpastpossibleagain.

In the third, final section ofmy paper, Iwill proffer some suggestions as to how

Luciansgenreofthecomicosatiricdialogueitselfismeantasacontributiontokeepingthe

classicaltraditionmeaningfulbycreativelyreworkingit.

1.MimesisMisunderstood:LuciansConceptionofTragedy

In order to understand Lucians conception of humour and his criticism of his

contemporaries,we have to recall the role of Attic language and literature for the self

definition of Greek intellectuals in the Second Sophistic5. Stephen Greenblatts notion of

3Onthispassagecf.KUHN1941,p.12.4SeetheoverviewinSEECK1994,p.234235.5Thistopichasrecentlybeenexploredbyanumberofexcellentstudies;someofthemostrecentareSWAIN1996;SCHMITZ1997;WHITMARSH2001;REARDON1971providesastillveryvaluableoverview.

MOSAQUE,revuedesjeuneschercheursenSHSLilleNorddeFranceBelgiquefrancophone1,juin2009

5

selffashioning is a helpful tool to understand the intersection of selfdefinition and

literature in Lucians times6. The Roman conquest ofGreece in the second century BCE

triggered a process which is now commonly described as Hellenization. But this term

obfuscates the janusfacednatureof this complexprocess,because it suggestsaonesided

transformation ofRoman life throughGreek culture.Yet theRomanswere anything but

passiverecipients.TheysoontriedtofreethemselvesfromGreekinfluenceandtostressthe

subordination of Greek culture to Roman power: Graecia captamight have civilized the

barbarousvictors,butitremainedGraeciacapta7.TheRomanattemptatdistinctionforcedthe

Greeks to reassert thevalueof, and topreserve, theirown cultural and literaryheritage.

Only thuscould theypreventGreek languageandculture frombeingsubduedbyRoman

power. Selffashioning, as Stephen Greenblatt has it, is achieved in relation to

somethingperceiveda