742. Cicero's Correspondence: A Literary Study by G.O. Hutchinson

742.  Cicero’s Correspondence: a literary study by G.O. Hutchinson.   This book is well worth a study.  Hutchinson makes the point that Cicero’s letters are crucial for so much concerning the Roman Republic.  Yet, what most scholars do today is plunder his letters for cultural and historical details.  Appreciation for these letters for their literary value is pretty much ignored.  Neglect of the literary aspect is due, the author believes, to the general neglect of prose.  Consequently many do not view letters as literature. (This was something I noticed, with a great degree of irritation, while in graduate school.) 

Cicero- Apsley House, London- the only surviving portrait labeled with his name.

Literary analysis can not ignore history nor can history ignore literary appreciation.  

Cicero himself suggests a division for letters:  informative, humor, consolation.  Cicero is aware of and reflects on the style required to meet the needs of the person he addresses.  As a result there is a wide differentiation of style required.  Apparently our man could do them all.  The use of rhythm varies according to his correspondent: those letters not to Atticus or Tiro or Terentia are almost all rhythmical.  

This pretty much smashes allegations that his rhythmical cadences were somewhat unconscious (as claimed by S. Bailey, for one) and for that matter the absence of rhythm does not indicate the absence of art.  

Letters to politicians display courtesy and friendliness, even to so-called tough guys.  The care in composition shows affection and interest. Letters have the intention to show sincerity to the reader using any number of devices:  sounds, word order, pleasantries, humor, etc.  

Hutchinson's first category:  Exile letters.

Cicero’s letters are often used to display his weakness of character and indicate that the letters are embarrassing, incoherent and random in structure.  Hutchinson says that this is not true.  He makes the case that his letters are demonstrations of powerful expressions.

Many scholars also claim that the letters display and abnormal personality and this shows his mercurial temper.  But most people do not take the time to appreciate how devastating the exile was not just to Cicero but to his brother, wife, daughter, son and household, the danger presented to his family. ( In fact his wife was actually manhandled to force any money which Cicero had left her.) 

His letters are not unusual.  Ovid, Catullus both wrote letters displaying deep emotion using forceful language.  Cicero’s behavior was not unusual either-  Quintus Metellus Celer, no wimp, put on mourning clothes in support of his brother whom he felt was mistreated by Cicero.

Ad Fam. xiv.4  A letter to Terentia is a tender letter of his love and affection set in powerful language.  The letter presents the problem of Terentia coming to see him in exile.  He takes great pains to make sure that she knows how much he cares for her but also is at pains to let her know that, if there is a chance for his recall, he would need her at Rome.   There is rhetorical skill at play in his efforts to say what he needs to say. 

Ad Att.  iii.7.  This letter is more controlled than the one to his wife.  There is some rhythm. Cicero takes care not to offend Atticus who had asked Cicero to stay at his villa in Epirus.  In this letter Cicero longs for isolation (while using a tricolon) in contrast to the letter to Terentia.  It makes sense that he is not going to write the same kind of letter to Atticus as to his family. In this letter he expresses his agony effectively.  He will not kill himself but living at the same time is a meaningless life.  Hutchinson seems to treat this in a way as a means for Cicero to express his anger/dismay,shock, depression.  Yet, does so, while in control of his mind.  A powerful alliteration (using “ms”) reveals his depth of feeling. 

Ad Quantum i.3  It is rhythmical and rhetorical and Cicero takes pains to explain himself to Quintus.  Cicero makes the point that out of love for Quintus he did not want to put him through the anguish of a meeting.  Some of the phrasing is also found in some speeches.  In this letter Cicero speaks of his son:

quem ego ferus et ferrus e complexu dimisi meo…

Whom I, hard and like iron, from my embrace sent away…

(Take the time to absorb the man's anguish.)

Cicero in this letter deals with a paradox: the emotions of a meeting and the danger to Quintus of prosecution.  He deals with this paradox to produce a sensible reason for his decision. 

It should be coming clear that Cicero adjusts his letters to the needs of the moment, the needs of the correspondent.

Consolation:

Cicero mentions in the Tusculan Disputations  (iii.73-79) that what is written must take into consideration the nature of the person addressed.

Ad Fam. v.16.  To Titius.  Titus lost children in a plague. Cicero artfully offers comfort.  He had waited to write because it was not considered to be in good taste to write about such things too soon..  Cicero uses self reproach to display sensitivity.  He uses “we” to join the two into a common mutual feeling.  All this via elegance.  Cicero discusses the common ground between philosophy and politics.  As an example he uses mors and immortalitas to combine the two possibilities of death.  

Ad Brutum i.9.  Cicero writes to Brutus on the death of Porcia, his wife.  Cicero treats Brutus as an authority on philosophy.  He uses philosophy to comfort his loss but suggests the need to serve the interests of the state (the crisis with Antony was in full swing).

Ad Fam. v.14.  This letter is from Lucius Lucceius.  He uses forceful language to jolt Cicero out of his misery. It is not done smoothly but it is forceful.  It is another example that not all people use the same technique and each used the approach that was felt best for the addressee.  

Ad Fam. iv. 5-6.  Servius Sulpicius Rufus to Cicero on the death of Tullia.  His view is rhetorical and meant to direct Cicero’s emotions.  He uses history immersed in personal experiences to make his case to minimize Cicero’s sadness.  Clearly Servius has a different approach than Cicero.  He should not be criticized for being different.  There are numerous ways to approach such a subject and each person, as Cicero suggests, should adapt to the nature of the addressee.  

These letters display a wide range of approach- all are different and all are valid.

(Perhaps the manner in which Brutus and Servius address Cicero tells us how open his personality was to such letters.- just a thought).

Narrative

The speeches show interest in using narrative to persuade and entertain.  The same is true for the letters.

Ad Fam.  x.30.  From Servius Sulpicius Galba, his report on the Battle of Forum Gallorum.  This letter was written so that Cicero could feel the uncertainty of battle as Galba experienced it.

Ad Fam.  xv.4  To Cato.  Cicero narrates the battle in Cilicia to persuade Cato to support the Supplicatio.  So the narrative is combined with rhythm and elegance to persuade.

Ad Atticum v.21.  This letter is about Scaptius/Brutus who together concocted a pretty dubious business deal.  Cicero here employs techniques found in plays by Terence.  This letter uses short clauses, historical infinitives to strengthen his case.  

Ad Fam. x.32.  From Pollio.  Pollio narrates the story of Balbus to help explain the difficulties he faces in Spain and does so artfully.

Dialogue

This was used in speeches and in the letters.  Cicero uses dialogue to describe and impact what he writes.

Ad Atticum v.1  Cicero uses dialogue and commentary to make the case for Quintus’ behavior and Pomponia’s lack of it.

Ad Atticum xv.11 This is, for me, a letter which always seemed greatly over used by historians as a hammer on Cicero’s personality.  Speakers in this letter are Servilia, Brutus, Cicero and Cassius.  They all were discussing problems facing them (final crisis of the Republic, recent death of Caesar).  As Cicero was talking Cassius butted in with very intense comment.  Then Brutus talks to Cicero in a very deferential way and with respect.  The contrast is meant to indicate that Cassius was rude.  Cicero even with Cassius and more so with Brutus shows humane conversational manner.  But when he addresses Brutus, he does not direct any of the conversation to Cassius.  Then later when Cicero and others were rehashing old missed opportunities, Servile breaks in and a shuts down Cicero.  He politely gives way and the conversation makes it clear that Servilia was out of line.  

It was fun to read this passage because most authors I have read put this whole thing down to something which made a fool out of Cicero.  Hutchinson does not see it that way at all.

It is worthwhile to quote Hutchinson:

Most important of all, they (the letters) show us how Cicero’s own verbal and personal sensitivity and his desire to persuade and be approved run through what he writes, and says, on every level.  Artfulness and art are never more apparent than when he seems merely to be playing back his mental tapes; but the artistry appears within his utterance as well as his narrative.  Nor is the urge to persuade cynical or amoral:  he wishes to show in himself, and those he commends, rectitude and restraint, good manners and good sense.  And his is driven, and wishes to to be seen as driven, by warm affection.

Time

Cicero’s references to the past, present and future force him to employ different kinds of thought in terms of the person addressed. The passage shows the complexity of thought which these letters have.

Humor

The use of humor shows that the correspondent is trusted.  Joking is used to put both in the same room.

Ad Fam. vii.18  to Trebatius.  It is clear from this letter that Trebatius treats Cicero with deference.  And Cicero teases Trebatius as an older man to a younger person.  Cicero uses humor to encourage their friendship.

Humor is handled in different ways with different people.  Cicero clearly enjoyed a variety of form and yet always managed to make clear his personal feelings.  He used humor as he did everything else- to be expressive.

Now I know why Atticus and Tiro published these letters- they saw in these examples of great literary value and examples for imitation and examples for despair that many people meet in life.  It is mostly in modern culture that we seem so smug in judging others.  Kind of weird that antiquity grasped this with ease, yet we have so much trouble with this.  I wonder if some of this is due to the massive fractionalization and specializing which has occurred in education.  

Here are some problems:

Hutchinson creates confusion by consistently setting up discussion for a particular letter only to write on and on about other letters, until finally addressing the letter at hand.  There are times he could be more succinct and clear by avoiding language which fails to make it clear.  Often a simple clear statement is all that is needed.