Tibullus: Elegy 1. 3

Summary

One of the most frequent errors made by critics who would defend Tibullus' poetry is the acceptance of the very standards of judgement which led earlier critics to attack it. Because they continue to ask the same, wrong questions about a poem, they should not be surprised to arrive at the same, wrong answers. The resulting conflict between an intuitive admiration for Tibullus and a negative judgement based upon the observation of apparent flaws has led even his staunchest defenders to make statements like the following:

La malchance de notre poète, c'est que, chez lui, les imperfections apparaissent au premier regard, alors qu'il faut quelque examen pour discerner les perfections.

The price of such disciplined artistry may be a lack of depth and internal movement, but the reward is lucidity and harmony of emotional colours.

Even a lenient judge must conclude that perfections which are concealed from the average reader by a host of flaws, or technique so refined that it produces shallow and static poetry can hardly be characteristic of a first-rate poet. Yet Quintilian names Tibullus first of the elegists, and we are loath to disagree.

One example of a critic asking the wrong question is Elder, when he discusses Tibullus' methods of achieving unity in his poems. This discussion should be viewed against a backdrop of those critics who called Tibullus an Ideenflüchtiger or saw only loose connections between the ‘episodes’ of a poem.