Love is a Cattlefield:
Longus’ Daphnis and Chloe
Originally Published on About.com’s Classic Literature Page
In classical
literature the ekphrasis—a detailed description of a work of art or
craftsmanship—was a common literary device that served as an enjoyable
digression and variation on how the larger story was being told, while also
working to mirror or illustrate an important aspect or theme of the work. Often
filling in a historical or psychological background, it wasn’t just a digressive
pause in a self-reflective and self-contained narrative backwater, but rather actually
added momentum to the story and often forcefully threw its subject back into
the flow of events. The most famous ekphrasis in all of literature is
Homer’s description of the shield of Achilles in Book 18 of the Iliad,
taking well over a hundred lines to draw back into a brilliantly forged mirror
of humanity at peace and war before completing its concentric circles and
thrusting Achilles forward into the bloody fray. Displaying a work of art
within a work of art for the reader/listener to experience as both a discrete
frame and as a fully connected part of life, this device’s reflexive aspects
are clear, reminding us that the work as a whole is itself a complete artifice,
an enclosed and reflective circle that’s nonetheless an integral and interwoven
part of the thread of our own lives. Books may be just an artificial series of marks bounded within static leaves of paper, totally unfazed by the rush of life around them, but
they’re still physical objects that we hold in our hands in the real world and
that often effect our actions as much as living people do. In Homer and Vergil,
and in the millennia of subsequent writers employing some variation of the ekphrasis as a meta-narrative strategy, the device usually serves as a brief reminder that we—like the works’ characters (and
authors)—are both looking and living. But one brilliantly singular “literary
pendant,” Longus’ second-century Greek novel Daphnis and Chloe, takes
the ekphrasis to its farthest extreme, forging the entirety of its
narrative out of a description of one single painting.
In a brief prologue the narrator
comes across a painting in a beautiful grove—with the painting described as being
even more beautiful than the grove itself—and he gives us this brief snapshot of it:
Women giving birth, others dressing the babies, babies exposed, animals suckling them, shepherds adopting them, young people pledging love, a pirates’ raid, an enemy attack—and more, much more….
Wanting to write something about the
painting, he finds someone to interpret its story for him so he can create “an
offering to Love, to the Nymphs, and Pan, and something for mankind to possess
and enjoy.” He claims that it will “cure the sick, comfort the distressed, stir
the memory of those who have loved, and educate those who haven’t.” In the four
perfect books that compose Daphnis and Chloe, Longus does all of that and
more. Much more….
Arthur Lemon’s The Wooing of Daphnis, 1881 |
The
way that Jean Racine’s play Phèdre adheres to its immediate audience’s
expectations for a generic love-interest diversion while offering
immeasurably more artistry and pathos to the larger world theater, Daphnis
and Chloe deftly aims its derring-do Greek-novel complications into a kind
of Cupid’s-arrow that keeps its unwavering sights on the luscious magic of
youthful love discovering itself. One of the great reminders that love and lust
are totally marvelous and pure and new for every single human being, this
novel’s depiction of ingenuous innocence reads like a Garden of Eden where sin
is impossible and where the flesh—along with the heart and the mind—follows the
decrees of its true unsullied nature.
An illustration from Daphnis and Chloe by Konstantin Somov |
In their
confusion about the desperate pangs that they’re both experiencing, Daphnis and
Chloe ask an old cowherd named Philetas about Love (aka Eros, aka Cupid), after
he tells them a story about his own experience with the lust-god, and he replies,
“There is no medicine for Love, no potion, no drug, no spell to mutter, except
a kiss and an embrace and lying down together with naked bodies.” They find
that this excites and frustrates them even further, still not knowing a thing
about doing what comes naturally (as Ethel Merman described it), and even
though they observe their livestock mating—but not lying down, which Chloe
objects to as contradicting Philetas’ advice—it’s only when Daphnis is
initiated by an older woman and given instructions about how to (and how not
to) proceed with Chloe that Cupid’s arrow starts to attain the balanced thrust
of its final trajectory.
In composing this ekphrastic essay on Longus’ artistic masterpiece, I’ve consulted three
different editions of the novel, all of which are worth mentioning to an
initiate looking to enter into its mysteries. The most useful by far is the
Christopher Gill translation that’s contained in Collected Greek Novels, which was edited and introduced by the incredibly well informed and informative B. P.
Reardon. Moses Hadas’ Three Greek Romances also contains good
introductory material, and as an edition is unique in including Dio
Chrysostom’s The Hunters of Euboea within its genre classification, and
Hadas’ translation is the most artistic of the three but is also occasionally
overly precious. Of special interest to art-lovers is Paul Turner’s
translation, which contains forty-two color lithographs by Marc Chagall,
creating a reverse-ekphrasis with its illustrations of a novel that
illustrates a painting. The prettiness of the Hadas and Turner editions masks
an ugly truth about Daphnis and Chloe’s world, however: the common practice of “exposure.”
When Daphnis and Chloe are abandoned, they’re exposed to the elements to die, a
kind of postpartum abortion, and Hadas and Turner’s translations elide both the
word and the concept, making the babies’ abandonment seem much less unsettling
to the modern reader. This was part of ancient reality, though, and part of
Longus’ art, and the Gill/Reardon edition gives us the most honest English
representation of the Greek original.
An illustration from Daphnis and Chloe by Marc Chagall |
Knowing this
detail, which takes place in the book’s first few pages, the reader will be
happy with whichever edition best suits his or her tastes and/or scholarly
requirements. I prefer the unmasked version—or, more accurately, the
least-masked version, which is the best that a translation can achieve—because
I believe that people don’t need to be protected from either truth or art. Because
this is a work whose truths and artifices are wholly enmeshed and are as primal
and complex as the intermingling world itself, the much larger interplay of
love and art and reality that’s represented in this extraordinary novel form an
artistic truth that’s so moving and so profound that its arcing thrust both
transcends and encompasses its specific—and novelistically idealized—universe.
Integrating both the natural and the human sphere into an ever-renewing cycle
of love, Daphnis and Chloe cannot fail to reach its mark in the reader’s
united mind and body.
—David
Wiley