But weÕll begin Wednesday with a discussion of Chap. 8 in Elaine FanthamÕs The Roman World of CiceroÕs De Oratore (Oxford 2005), on ÔWit and Humour as the OratorÕs Combat WeaponsÕ (pp. 186-208). Be prepared to give a short critique of what you see to be the strengths and weaknesses of the chapter...or if you prefer, to identify what you most liked and/or disliked about it.
As I mentioned, IÕve left two photocopies of this on our reserve shelf in Denny 210 (the seminar room): feel free to remove one to make a copy for yourself, but please return it asap whence it came.
You may recall that at the beginning of the quarter I suggested you read ZetzelÕs recent Bryn Mawr Classical Review piece on this book as a way to get some sense of the current status of work on the De orat. If you havenÕt read that yet, you might – after reading this chapter – find it interesting:
WeÕll spend most of Monday translating that big chunk in Book 2 mentioned above (2.216-290) – CaesarÕs disquisition on humor and wit, which is also the subject of FanthamÕs chapter. So lots to think about there. But as far as Book 3 goes, IÕd like you to ponder in particular its beginning and its end. Specifically:
á Each Book begins, as you will have noticed, with a brief preface that ÔbreaksÕ the illusion of the dialogue – it brings us, that is, back into the ÔpresentÕ before returning us to the ÔpastÕ of the dialogue. But why at this juncture does Cicero choose to discuss the deaths of the characters involved? What do you see as the purpose and effect of such a decision?
á Endings, of course, are just as important as beginnings: think about how the De oratore ends. Does it seem to you a reasonable, even logical ending? Is it effective...or not? How does it contrast with the way the work begins?