24 / CHRONICLESnOPINIONSnA Fool in the Forest by Fred Chappelln”Shall they hoist me up and show me to the shoutingnvarletry of censuring Rome?”n—William ShakespearenThe Tristia of Ovid, translated bynDavid R. Slavitt, Cleveland:nBellflower Press.nThe true facts of the case will lienhidden in time forever. For ournpurpose here, we can accept the officialnversion; that the emperor Augustusnin the year 8 A.D. exiled the poetnOvid to Tomis, a harsh and barbarousntown on the edge of the empire,nbecause he had published his ArsnAmatoria or Art of Love some 10nyears earlier (and because of some mysteriousnerror). Those verses werenjudged — perhaps during a secretnhearing—to tend to corrupt the moralsnof the Roman people.nFor the rest of his life, the poet’snwhole output is devoted to attempts tonregain favor, to regain his former carefreenlife at Rome. To this end hensometimes tries to defend his work andnto justify the poet’s vocation. ButnOvid, charming and graceful and mellifluous,nis no man’s heavy thinker.nFew artists are, though popular opinionnoften burdens them with that reputation.nStill, the case is instructive innour decades when censorship has oncenmore become a salient issue.nnnIn Tristia II, the longest single poemnof the series, we can count at least 18nseparate defenses. The fact that theynare often muddled, inchoate, and mutuallyncontradictory merely makesnthem more poignant. Ovid presentsnthem in this order: (1) powerless innitself, poetry makes nothing happen;n(2) only part of the Art of Love isnnaughty, much more is decorous; (3)npoetry, like the law, aids civilization;n(4) the Art is addressed only to “licit”nlovers; (5) literature is ironic and maynbe misunderstood; (6) all literary worknoffers some possible moral risk; (7)neven the religious myths treat of salaciousnmatters; (8) I, Ovid, must benseen as a trivial person, not to be takennseriously; (9) I am an incompetentnadvisor; (10) “My Muse is raffish perhaps,nbut not I”; (11) erotic literature isnall the fashion nowadays; (12) the poetnmust speak of life as it really is; (13)nthough official morality changes,nhuman nature does not; (14) othernpoets have written much more frankly;n(15) and in fact I could have done sonmyself; (16) it is bad policy to makenpoets martyrs in the name of freedomnof speech; (17) writers may changentheir bad ways, as I have done; (18) Inhave never abused poetic privilege bynmaking personal attacks.nIt is obvious that if Ovid’s first defensenis true, that literature has noninfluence over events or behavior,nmost of the rest of his defenses arenirrelevant. But this notion is contradictednby his third defense, in whichnhe links himself with Caesar as ancivilizing agent. It is impossible tonhave it both ways.nIf the poet is truly irresponsible,nmerely at hire as an interior decorator,nthen he has no inner standards tonappeal to. He is at the mercy of popularntaste and official edict—and itnFred Chappell’s most recent book isnThe Source (Louisiana StatenUniversity Press).n