Chapter 3 of D.S. Carne-Ross' monograph on Pindar (YUP 1985) is called "An Ode Takes Shape." Carne -Ross wants "for once to try to trace in imagination the genesis of an ode --- not the mysterious process whereby a work of art comes into being, but the way a writer observing strict conventions and with a patron to satisfy goes about his task. The attempt to peer into the poet's workshop cannot be more than speculation, yet it may throw light on things that a formal analysis does not tidily handle." (p. 79). What we get is a kind of short story about Pindar visiting Argos in order to compose Nemean 10. He hears about an old family tradition at dinner on his first evening in Argos: "the family make it clear that they want this story worked into the song, and rightly so --- it throws a great deal of light on the victory. Otherwise they leave the poet a pretty free hand (unlike some clients who practically try to write the song for you)." (p. 81). An old shepherd tells him about Lynkeus "Work this in, nice local color. ... Vivid stuff, should certainly be used, but it must not be allowed to overshadow the ending, which has to be high and solemn" (pp. 84-5). Other stories are "low stuff" or should be handled "tactfully". "Olive, olive wreath, Olympian victory ... A bit obvious maybe, but right for here. Bring second triad to a crescendo with this. Probably needs a picture." (p. 84). He thinks over the structure of his narrative: "That gives you the neat ab:BA shape. Careful plotting overlaid, almost hidden, by rich language and treatment. It always works." etc.
I think that this piece of fiction, apart from being an excellent read, really works as a specimen of Pindaric scholarship in that it makes compellingly clear how Carne-Ross perceives of all those much disputed issues like compositional unity in Pindar, structure of Pindaric odes, relevance of the myth, etc.
I would be very interested to learn what the members of this list think of the scientific value of such fictional accounts. If such an account convinces, it convinces not because of carefully documented arguments, but because of the plausibility of the complete picture. The fictional approach has the advantage of being holistic. Does it perhaps fill a gap? Do we need a new journal that aims at filling this gap? Or are we to condemn such an approach because it is difficult to argue with speculative fiction? Or are we to accept the fiction as a hypothesis, which can be replaced by another more plausible hypothesis, i.e., a better story? Would it be useful if the author of any momograph on any subject, after having studied and presented the evidence with scutinity, adds an epilogue in which he says: "So much for the evidence, what I *imagine* that happened was this." Or is it better to leave such things to dinner table conversation?
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Ilja Leonard Pfeijffer
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Leiden University Classics Department
Doelensteeg 16, Gebouw 1174
Postbus 9515
2300 RA Leiden
The Netherlands.Tel.: 31-(0)71-5272774
Fax: 31-(0)71-5272615pfeijffer@rullet.leidenuniv.nl
http://www.leidenuniv.nl/gltc/ilja/info.html