PetroniusReviews

Satíricon é uma obra da literatura latina de autoria do prosador romano Petrônio, escrita provavelmente próximo do ano 60 d.C., que descreve as aventuras e desventuras do narrador, Encólpio, do seu amante Ascilto e do servo, o jovem Gitão, que se intromete entre os dois amantes provocando ciúme e discussão. Juntamente com o poeta Eumolpo, embarcam em aventuras diversas acabando naufragados nas mãos de Circe, uma sacerdotisa do deus Príapo.

Hard to know what to say about this one. The introduction descends into an account of editions over the ages that reads at times like a parody of academia (I can tentatively say that if you want parodic levels of academic disagreement, head straight for your local Classics department), but is useful.

Satyricon itself? Well, it's fitfully amusing, over the top, confusing (what we have is basically a heap of fragments) and sometimes ... I almost typed "postmodern."

Wait, I *did* type postmodern! Why did I do that?

This was, of course, the source for the Fellini film, which I disliked.

I'm grieved to report that Harvard U. Press has apparently fallen to the temptation to eschew employing proofreaders, or at least good ones. Typos abound. This tendency first really shocked me when I encountered it in a book from U. of Chicago, an outfit I esteemed highly -- now ... well, what can you do? Accuracy is for ninnies, apparently -- or is too expensive to care about (but you're HARVARD).

The best way to read this fragmented masterpiece is by doing it between the walls of a university library, surrounded by droves of people intent on cramming for their upcoming exams. You're guaranteed to be eyed viciously by the students who have enough nosiness to inquire on the book sitting upright in your hands, but that's just part of the fun. I would absolutely like to read the missing chapters before my departure from this world.

I just... I didn't vibe with this book at all. I don't think the translation helped either, because it was all over the place with 60's slang and what I can only presume was an unsuccessful attempt at giving the characters accents.

I just... I didn't vibe with this book at all. I don't think the translation helped either, because it was all over the place with 60's slang and what I can only presume was an unsuccessful attempt at giving the characters accents.

but LOVED the film... the book would never end

Satiricón (Petronio)
El asno de oro (Apuleyo)

A satire of a roman feast. Funny and entertaining in general but somehow I just wasn`t interested.
The english translation isn`t the best.½

Prudery knows no end, it is true. But anything in which Oscar Wilde takes a hand is always worth reading.

So this is like a Roman Brideshead Revisited, a fantasy of lushness beyond this world. Only Petronius's fantasies include less Catholic moral reckoning and English awkwardness (which can carry an erotic charge just like anything can mate) and more let's be generous and call it "ephebophilia" and, like, elaborate Roman turduckens.

Borrowed from library to educate myself! Petronius (d 66 AD) was a courtier at Nero's court - this story forms part of the Satyricon.
The narrator and his friends are invited to an over the top banquet at the home of wealthy but vulgar Trimalchio. This is interesting principally because of the glimpse into an alien world - the show stopper culinary creations; the lovely boy slaves; the entertainers; the conversation. The 21st century reader sees that the people weren't so different to ourselves, as they discuss money and the state of the world. Unlike other writers of the period, Petronius tries to create a real character in the host.
Short read (55 p)

A picaresque novel set in Nero's time in which protagonist jumps from bad situation to worse, lover to lover, male to female lovers. Famous for feast scene at wealthy freeman's house. This is only remaining section of much larger work, so probably lacks full intended effect. Also has sections of poetry.

This has pederasty, paedophilia, voyeurism and impotence and is really quite brilliant. The beginning and end have been lost over the last 2000 years and the remaining text is fragmentary but it's well worth a read, if only to be left with that pleasing sensation of wanting more. The scene where the Priestess of Priapus is about to take a whalebone dildo to the hero is sadly truncated. Highly recommended.

An interesting look at a Roman feast that even the narrator thinks is ostentatious.

(Once a month through 2013, CCLaP staff writer Karl Wolff investigates literature of a more carnal kind with The NSFW Files. Despite the erotic nature of the works, is there literary value to be found? For all the essays in this series, please click here.)

The Satyricon
Review by Karl Wolff

The History: Because The Satyricon is so ancient, the actual publication date had remained ambiguous until recent scholarship pointed towards the 1st century CE. Petronius lived during the reign of Nero, no stranger to sexual kinks. Historically speaking, this novel fragment can be considered pre-Christian. While Christianity was growing during Nero's reign, at that time it was still a new Jewish sect in a provincial imperial backwater. Nero ruled the Roman Empire from 54 to 68. The Edict of Milan, that stipulated that Christians could worship without oppression, was signed by the Roman Emperor Constantine in 313. Emperor Theodosius I made Christianity the official state religion of the Roman Empire in 380, although persecution of non-Christians and Christian heretics (specifically the Donatists) occurred during Constantine's reign. In terms of names and dates, the Synod of Nicaea, which established the Nicene Creed, would be in 325. St. Augustine's monumental City of God, that laid the groundwork for Catholic dogma, would come out in 5th century CE. To reiterate, The Satyricon is a pre-Christian work.

I make note of the names and dates to underline that much of our modern perceptions have been shaped by Western Christianity. The Satyricon, in its realistic, sometimes bawdy, depictions of everyday Roman life is a means to escape this mentality. (Literature is escapism, right?) This is literary escapism for a positive educational purpose. Even that previous sentence, lending educational credence to a novel full of fornication, satire, and violence, bubbles up from my own subconscious. (I need to make sure this is valuable to readers.) Reading something full of sex, comedy, and killing, just because it has these things, would be immoral. Or not. Just read it for fun. I did. Along the way, you will see Rome at the height of its powers and in the throes of moral decadence (see "Trimalchio's Banquet" below).

The Book: Petronius Arbiter's novel fragment chronicles the misadventures of the narrator Encolpius, a former gladiator, and Giton, his sixteen-year-old slave and lover. Along the way, they meet Ascyltus, a friend of Encolpius, and rival for Giton's affections. The trio meet Quartilla, a priestess to the Priapus cult, in the market and get accused of infiltrating the cult. They are sexually tortured. Encolpius and Giton get split up, with Encolpius sleeping with Quartilla and Giton sleeping with a virgin girl.

A couple days later, Encolpius and his friend Agamemnon get invited to the freedman Trimalchio's house. What occurs is classic satire. Trimalchio, who possesses extreme wealth, exhibits the gaudy tastelessness of the Roman nouveau riche. Elaborate meals, a fake funeral for himself, and supernatural stories about werewolves and witches are told. Trimalchio's antics prove that the crassness and excess of the wealthy are still a rich seam for humorists. (If you're a fan of Suborgatory, you'll love "Trimalchio's Banquet.") When one discusses The Satyricon, "Trimalchio's Banquet" is most often mentioned, a hilarious set-piece that is still funny to this day.

The next day, Encolpius discovers Giton with Ascyltus. There are quarrels and sulking, until they decide to part, Giton leaving with Ascyltus. In the marketplace, Encolpius meets the old poet Eumolpus. Both discuss their woes. Eumolpus tells the story of how he seduced a boy while employed as his tutor. That is the second set-piece of The Satyricon, where the Eumolpus promises the boy he will give him a horse if he'll let him touch him. The seduction occurs over several days and in incremental stages. Later on, Giton returns and Eumolpus and Encolpius vie for Giton's affections. In later sections, Encolpius and Giton encounter pirates and Encolpius suffers from impotence. Because of this affliction, Encolpius seeks out a magical cure. In the end, after other misadventures, Eumolpus is discovered dead and is consumed in an act of ritual cannibalism.

The Verdict: Because of my attitude toward literature, censorship, and education, I will more than likely take the stance that every piece of literature has some value. The issue arises whether X,Y, or Z piece of fiction has "literary value." But, answer me this, what is literary value? Does literary value extend beyond better-than-average craftsmanship? Does literary value accrue once a work has a sustained positive critical reputation? Is literary value gained from attention garnered because said work is a historical artifact? And it is dangerous to ascribe modern literary standards to work that is over two thousand years old? Finally, is the notion of separating literary and historical value a correct path to take? After all, literary critics and historians have two separate sets of standards in what should and shouldn't be preserved.

Those are a lot of questions. But they are questions that need asking. Keep them in mind when we investigate the rest of these novels. Back to the matter at hand, Petronius Arbiter's novel fragment does have both literary and historical value. It is one of the few historical artifacts that illustrate everyday life in the Roman Empire. (One sees The Satyricon's influence in the HBO series Rome. Noted conservative screenwriter John Milius is the showrunner and he guides the show's realism, not shying away from the ordinary violence and sexuality* that permeated Roman culture.) Despite its fragmentary form, The Satyricon foreshadows the ribald masterpieces Gargantua and Pantagruel, Don Quixote, The Ubu Plays, and Ulysses. Everything from satire, farce, picaresque, and absurdism owe Petronius a debt. On a more mundane note, the novel fragment also inspired countless students to learn Latin (all the better to read it in the original and hunt down willful mistranslations by prudish translators -- see the Loeb Edition for examples). With our culture desperately working to make the planet more family-friendly, The Satyricon exposes us to a history that is violent, sexually depraved, economically unjust, and delightfully decadent, much like our own.

*This sexuality included relations between an adult male (Encolpius) and Giton, a sixteen-year-old slave. Slavery aside, the underage status of Giton makes this work controversial. While a normal practice in Rome and throughout Europe well into the Victorian age, the issue of underage sex should not be evaded. Again, when this was written, this wasn't an issue. Today, in light of the Catholic Church's numerous pedophilia scandals, it is an important topic to confront. What's the difference here? Immoral acts versus immoral words. Furthermore, The Satyricon is a work of fiction and a historical artifact from an ancient culture. Calls from worried parents, clerics, and politicians to ban this work doesn't solve the immediate problem at hand. The sexual abuse of children is a very real problem for any society. Perhaps giving pedophiles stricter sentences than non-violent pot smokers may be a step in the right direction.

http://www.cclapcenter.com/2013/02/the_nsfw_files_the_satyricon_b.html

OR

http://driftlessareareview.com/2013/02/22/the-nsfw-files-the-satyricon/

This is hardly a review, but I put these words here so that they can be read by those who may profit from them. First, there is another English translation, by William Arrowsmith, which is not simply a consummate work of scholarship, but a zesty and entertaining read. Nothing can ever touch it. Second, such is the state of classical knowledge in this degenerate age that I should point out that although the book itself bars the title including the name "Petroniua Arbiter, "Arbiter" is, of-course, not a name, but an honorific.

This is a clear, straightforward translation of this superbly funny bit of "adult" reading that had monks chuckling in their scriptoria down the ages. A "must have" for that corner of the book shelves where Catullus' poetry and Lysistrata dwell.

a much annotated version of the p.v.

As an adolescent I was fascinated to the point of obsession with films and took out every book on the cinema our local library possesed. The pictures from Fellini's Satyricon [Film Yearbook for 1969] intigued me and my pre-teen senses were inflamed by the beauty of the youths playing Encolpius, Gitone and Ascilto and titilated by the implied perversity of their roles.

To my surprise we had a copy of the Satyricon on the shelves at home and I determined to read it. I don't know when it was published but it was back in the days when any hint of sexual activity was renederd in Latin and only the fairly dull - well, dull depending on what you're looking for - were in English.

I read a complete translation a few years later, although at that stage having studied Latin for five years I might have had better luck making out the original, and was disappointed by the fragmentary and choatic nature of the novel. At school and later at university we studied dinner at Trimalchios and it still resonates in my mind as an excellent and enirely unsettling depiction of disorganised and excessive consumption.

I'm usually the first to urge people to read the book before and after seeing the film: here I must admit Fellini's Satyricon was excellent, a visual and sensual triumph, and somewhat of an improvement on the text.

I'm not qualified to assess Arrowsmith's translation, but his introduction and notes were very helpful, and Petronius' satire is a ripe and riotous read.½

Good student text with lots of helpful vocab/notes.½

I remember the sense I had as a child that sexual perversity had been invented in the 1960's. Before that, everyone did it purely for procreation, and only to people they were married to.

This was often the face put forward in the fifties, the dark ages of sex as culture. It's no wonder that this is where we get stories about couples having no idea what they are actually supposed to do on their wedding nights.

The depression and the war had resulted in a great deal of cultural power being centralized. Nationalism, McCarthyism, church-based religion and patriotism are all about surrendering individuality for the safety of the group. Sure, the most eccentric 5% of the populace will be imprisoned, committed, or blacklisted, but the dull majority will be able to cling to the reliability of enforced normalcy.

This also allows the culture to transfer the energy normally spent on chasing tail to material production. There's a reason the puritans and Amish get so much done. However, once the war, persecution, and economic hardship disappear, leisure returns, and with it, recreational sex.

That isn't to say that there was no recreational or enjoyable sex in the fifties. It was not sex itself that went away, but the cultural discourse that has often surrounded it.

As usual, anyone who looks to the literature of the past can find all the peculiarity and perversity their heart desires. From Fanny Hill to De Sade to Sappho, there is plenty of sexual history to contend the myth that the clitoris was discovered in the 1960's. Most fourteen year old girls can tell you it doesn't take a team of scientists to find it. Fourteen year old boys might disagree.

The Satyricon presents a great deal of straightforward sexuality, including all the various sodomies and same-sex pairing. Particularly interesting from a sociological standpoint is the sympathetic presentation of pederasty. For the uninitiated, this is a sexual relationship between a grown man and a pubescent boy.

Pederasty has been recorded among many cultures, from the Spartans and other Greeks to the Romans, Japanese Samurai, and the most prestigious colleges of Britain and America. It was often a method to tutor the young man in the ways of life, not just sex.

After the West romanticized sexuality between women and men under Christianity, a father might have brought his son to the town prostitute to 'educate' him. In my youth, it took place with vintage issues of Playboy passed from friend to friend. Now we have the internet and sex ed in school.

Each method has its strengths, but as the Satyricon shows, they are different means to the same end: producing a fully-fledged member of your society. Though pederasty is now a deviant practice, it is not inherently psychologically damaging (at least, not more than any other sexual relationship).

Even sexual abuse is not necessarily harmful outright. Psychological damage comes from the reaction of the social moralizing after the fact. The culture of victimization and powerlessness saps all strength and identity from those who have been forced to endure unfortunate circumstances. A man who becomes bankrupt is not hurt by the loss of pieces of paper, but by losing the freedom and power the culture ascribes to them.

Some have argued that youths cannot make informed decisions, and hence are liable to fall into manipulative and unequal relationships. While this is certainly true, most full-grown adults are equally uninformed and prone to manipulation.

I don't mean to suggest any need to change our laws, since our cultural traditions have no place for pederasty. However, I would suggest that people try to appreciate that our traditions are just as arbitrary as those of the Romans. There's nothing like history to remind us that there are many, many ways.

The Satyrican is also historically important for its uniquely accessible form. It is one of the only surviving examples of a novel-type narrative from the Roman tradition. It depicts the lives of small people and their everyday lives, from theater to dinner parties to beggars, prostitutes, and impotence.

The tale even follows the form of a comedic picaresque romance. Even though there is no direct tradition linking the development of the modern novel in seventeenth century Spain and the nearly identical narrative structure of the Satyricon, it provides an example of parallel evolution for the edification of literary critics.

The lighthearted tone and humorous situations give this work a remarkably modern feel. Indeed, it is more accessible than many newer works. It is intriguing for its presentation of Roman life, for its similarities with the novel, and for its frank depiction of the unheroic.

The Greeks and Romans developed calculus, crossbows, and steam power a thousand years before they would enter common use. Why should they not also innovate realism? I find comfort in the fact that the funny sex novel predates the codification of the bible. It seems history is as much the property of the prurient as the holy.

Only fragments remain from the original and so what we have here is, well, fragmentary. Some bits are amusing, some bits are confusing, and it all naturally enough goes nowhere. The "plot", such as there is, bears remarkable similarity to that of the second Austin Powers movie. With slightly more gay sex.½

This is a fairly unpleasant work of fiction, written sometime during the period of ancient Rome, perhaps shortly after the fall of Julius Caesar, and translated sometime in the 19th Century. The narrator and main character is Encolpius, a ne'er do-well thief and hanger-onner of the wealthy and high-born, who seems to spend the book flitting from orgy to orgy, at which everybody feasts mightily and bequeaths their sexual favors to the desirable of either sex, stealing and fleeing as opportunity arises. His troubles begin when he falls for a beautiful slave boy, Gito, who has also captured the fancy of a wealthy patron and patroness. The two flee together, are recaptured but talk their way out of punishment, and Encolpius is eventually seized upon by a lecherous patroness who has him beaten when he is unable to perform. Encolpius and Gito are liberated at the end when their master is killed by an angry mob. The book is ponderous and clumsy, with nary a sympathetic character, and whole pages are sometimes untranslated from the Latin. My own Latin classes are too long ago to tackle these passages. The main redeeming thing about the book is the image of ancient Rome as a land of depravity and debauchery. It would be interesting to learn if this odd and depressing little book paints an accurate picture.½

Fragmented novel(?)amazing scenes satirizing the worst of the best of Roman society.½