Horace
wrote the poem in 17 B.C. at the orders of the first emperor of Rome, Augustus.
The occasion was the ludi saeculares
or Secular Games, put on every one hundred years or so to greet the arrival of
a new saeculum or epoch. The poem, Talbot
makes clear, was intended as a marketing tool for Augustus’ reign, following
the dismemberment of the Republic. Despite the dubious worth of Horace’s Latin original,
Talbot concludes Sisson’s English rendering is “one of his best poems.” As
Talbot says, “…Sisson’s `Carmen Saeculare’
[In the Trojan Ditch, 1974] – exactly
in the manner of Pope’s updated rewritings of Horace’s epistles – lets contemporary
London stand in for Augustan Rome.” Some of us will remember Johnson’s imitations
of Juvenal, “London” and “The Vanity of Human Wishes.” Here are five of Sisson’s
nineteen stanzas, including the line Talbot adapts for his title:
“Can
you remember the expression ‘Honour’?
There
was, at one time, even Modesty.
Nothing
is so dead it does not come back.
“There
is God. There are no Muses without him.
He
it is who raises the drug-laden limbs
Which
were too heavy until he stood at Saint Martin’s.
“It
is he who holds London from Wapping to Richmond,
May
he hold it a little longer, Saint George’s flag
Flap
strenuously in the wind from the west country.
“Have
you heard the phrase: ‘the only ruler of princes’?
Along
the Thames, in the Tower, there is the crown.
I
only wish God may hear my children’s prayers.
“He
bends now over Trafalgar Square.
If
there should be a whisper he would hear it.
Are
not these drifting figures the chorus?”
As
Talbot explains, Sisson subverts Horace’s toadying and critiques the England of
his day (much as Johnson had done two centuries earlier with Juvenal). Earlier
lines in the poem, Talbot says, drip with “caustic ironies,” while these “give
way to something more like yearning.” Talbot gives three reasons for the poem’s
excellence – its rich allusiveness (the final stanza quoted echoes the London
of “The Waste Land”), the way it “partakes deeply of the nature of [Sisson’s]
own original poems,” and, most intriguingly, “the ease with which Sisson gets
at Christian feeling not despite, but on the strength of, the classical and
specifically the Roman.” There’s much historical precedent for such strategies,
of course. Every translation, adaptation or imitation mingles past and
present, encouraging readers to compare and contrast them like a series of
transparencies in an anatomy text laid one atop another. In a prose commentary included with the poems
and translations in In the Trojan Ditch,
Sisson says his version of “Carmen
Saeculare” “comes near to being a new start from the old original,” and
adds:
“Horace
is a hard nut to crack, and others before me have broken their teeth on him. But
he does yield his nourishment and, in the measure that it is extracted, one becomes
aware of a poet of great depth as well as polish – a poet invaluable in our
time not least because of his lack of sympathy with our most current
prejudices.”
No comments:
Post a Comment