The first essay question is from part 18:
In defending Archias, Cicero also extolled the study of liberal arts. In a well-written essay, show how in this section Cicero builds his argument from the specific to the general in his defense of poetry and literature. What rhetorical devices do you think helped his presentation. Why do you think he ended this section in his way?
The second essay question is from parts 10 and 25:
In sections 10 and 25, Cicero describes the granting of citizenship to recipients seemingly "less worthy" than Archias. Contrast these situations with that of Archias. Why does he seem "more worthy" of citizenship than the others? What tone is prevalent in both examples and why?
Soooooo have fun with these!...I guess.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
For the question from part 18:
Well, Cicero's main specific example of his "defense of poetry and literature" (yeah...whatev) is when he talks about Archias and his exquisite abilities as an impromptu speaker, or in Latin, "dicere ex tempore". Cicero goes on in the following lines to describe how he (Cicero) has seen Archias revered for his talents by other authors! Hooow exciting :). To end his specific example, Cic asks a rhetorical question in line 8: "Should I not love him (Archias), should I not admire him, and should I not think that he ought to be defended by any means". Here, Cic is basically saying that only an idiot wouldn't defend Archias.
Moving on to the broader example: Cicero indicates, starting in line 10, that the poet is strong because of nature itself, "poetam natura ipsa valere", and furthermore, that poets seem to be divinely inspired "quasi divino quodam spiritu inflari". He ends the passage with another specific, starting in line 12, literally translated as: "Wherefore that Ennius of our by his own right (word) called the poets blessed because they seem to be interusted to us as if they were a gift and reward of the divine", meaning that this famous poet Ennius thinks he, and all other poets, has some special god-given talent. I think Cic ended the section in this way because the emphasis of this passage was on the almost above-human qualities that poets possess- and he effectively made a case for this assertion being completely true :).
As for rhetorical devices, the simile describing how the poets are somehow divinely inspired helps prove Cic's point. Yeah.
The second question from parts 10 and 25:
In section 10, Cicero discusses the fact that, in Greece, citizenship was given to many ordinary people, with no talents (or very few talents). Then Cicero disses actors, saying that certainly the Rhegians, Locrians, Neopalitans, and Tarentines would of course have given Archias citizenship, cuz they gave it to actors. He ends section 10 by stating that a lot of these citizenships were illegal anyways. So basically, since Archias is a famous poet and all, he obviously has the right, before all these people who don't matter or who are criminals, to be a citizen!!!
In part 25, Cic says that if they don't give Archias citizenship, he could easily go to a Roman general and get citizenship. Then more rhetorical questions, the first involving the fact that Sulla would've granted Archias citizenships too, since he gave it to the Spaniards and Gauls (who must've been morons). Then he talks about Sulla being mean to this poor bad poet (lol), and ends by talking more about the genius of Archias (and that Sulla would've loved it, and all.) Agan, in this passage, Cicero makes every person who he mentions as having gained citizenships from the various provinces as clearly inferior to Archias, who is a genius and all.
Annie Alexandrian
p.2
3/16/08
Cicero Journal #5
While defending Archias, Cicero first starts speaking specifically about Archias’s passion for poetry and literature. He speaks about how although Archias would often speak about the same subjects in his poem each time he would change the way he spoke. So, Archias had the ability to speak constantly about the same ideas and no one ever got bored. I feel that Cicero’s mention of that ability is very good idea, because it truly a gift for someone to be able to still have the same praise even if they speak about the same stuff. Cicero also speaks about how intricate Archias’s writing is and how much meaning lies in his work and how he could be considered equal to one of the Greats (best Ancient writers). He then asks the jury if he should not defend such a man of Archia’s caliber.
When Cicero starts to talk generally, he speaks about how ingenious men who were so skilled from other studies all felt that the skill of poetry it truly a gift that is natural, because it is the poet’s mine and soul who cultivates his work. There are no rules or training that teach them to be talented in poetry. So, I believe he is saying that one can train themselves to be talented in any study but when it comes to poetry you either have it or you don’t (it all depends on nature).
Also Cicero speaks of Ennius who said poets are holy (sanctos) since their talent, their gift seems to be so divine as if sent from the Gods.
Cicero use many rhetorical devices, such as an anaphoras (the repetition of a single word) in lines 1,3,7 with the use of the word “vidi” (how often have I seen this man). I feel by his repetitive use he is declaring not only is he defending Archias as a lawyer but as a person who has seen him and his talent, and not want to see it go to waste. I feel it strengthens his argument because he speaks of great things Archias does and he himself has seen it in action. He also uses rhetorical question, I which he asks the jury if he should not defend a man he admires so much. (line 8). I feel he perfectly placed that part in his speech, because he speaks so greatly about him and then asks the jurors to give him a reason why he should not defend Archias, when he has a gift sent from the gods that they should treasure.
Annie A
2/16/08
Cicero Journal 6
In both passages 10 and 25 the granting of citizenship is compared to the granting of people who are less erudite and “unworthy” than Archias. Cicero is already enrolled in other cities. Then he speaks about how in Greece the govt. just gives citizenship to basically anyone that they did not even have skill to offer to the flourishing of the city. Also the Rhegnines, Neapolitans and other places would give citizenship away to actors (which was considered a very low class job)) and then he asks would they not have given citizenship to a man of such great genius like Archias. He is basically telling the court if they must think that other cities would not give him citizenship when they already give it to people with such little skill. He also says how, could the court turn him down when he desires to be a Hereclean out of all the cities he has been offered to be a part of. I feel he is saying how can we let such a prestigious man leave when he wants to be one of us.
In 25, he talks about how Sulla, a General, would give citizenship to the Spaniards and the Gauls. He also speaks about how Sulla gave a bad poet a prize afer he wrote an epigram about him. I feel the mention of that serves as a way of saying “well, Archias, is a great poet, who has wrote so greatly about us, what prize should be bestow upon him? How about citizenship? Since if they do give him citizenship they can hear him continue to write greatly about Italy. He is more worthy of citizenship than other people because he has a lot to offer to Italy.
In both examples, I feel Cicero is using a tone of sarcasm because he mentions how people with little ability got citizenship and would they continue to turn down Archias as one of their own, like the judges might do?
Hey I just wanted to say I am sorry I did not come on Saturday, I had a SAT class at SM from 9 to 1 pm. I did not realize it would last all the way to 1 pm. I really wanted to come, I understand if I can no longer be a part of the act, because I did miss an important practice! but I still would like to be a part of it if I can. thanks
-Annie
Cicero Journal #5
In section 18, Cicero goes from a specific argument to a more general one. Cicero praises Archias for his ability to improvise (dicere ex tempore). Archias is able to speak about certain events multiple of times, without ever boring anybody. He changes the way he recites the verses keeping things interesting everytime- and that's talent. Then he talks about the other arts and how they have certain rules, restrictions, and methods- while poetry is unassisted, powered by nature and inspired by the mind, as if it were divine.
Cicero asks rhetorical questions (Should I not admire him? Should I not defend him? etc.) to show that it would be an obvious act to defend such a great poet as Archias. Throughout the section, Cicero uses anticipation. He draws conclusions using "sic" (sic=thus). It brings all his points together into one unifying idea.
"ad veterum scriptorum laudem"
Archias comes to equal the veteran/well-established writers.
It's important to draw conclusions after you state all your reasons in a speech because you want your audience to hear what your overall standing is, constantly.
He ends the section with saying that Ennius thinks of poets being holy because they have a divine talent given to them by the gods. I think he ends this section this way to make his point that poets are up high in the hierarchy because of their godly talents. And if they are so divine and great, don't they deserve the highest respect and citizenship from anywhere they desire?
Cicero Journal #6
In 10, Cicero says that ordinary people with no distinct talents were given citizenship. In Reginos, Locrensis, and Neapolitanos, the actors there (low-class position), were also given citizenship. Archias, being a poet (high-class position), would then obviously be worthy of citizenship because other people with no talents and people with an inferior talent had received citizenships.
In 25, Cicero says that if Archias won't be given citizenship, he could get it from a general, Sulla, who had given citizenship to Gauls and Spaniards. Then he goes on and talks about a bad poet writing an epigram for Sulla and receiving a prize for it.
Cicero makes Archias seem so worthy of citizenship by making these points. People of no talent, of mediocre talent, and of low status were all given citizenship. Archias is a very talented and well respected and known poet. With Archias' status, Cicero makes a point that Archias is even more deserving, than the other people, of receiving citizenship.
it's coming... i'll do it tomorrow
Cicero Journals 5&6
3/23/08
better late than never...
5.
Cicero states that Archias was praised by older authors (veterum scriptorium) who liked his work. I suppose this is a fairly specific argument of Cicero’s and it seems that the praise of older authors meant a great deal back in ancient Rome considering this is one of the opening statements in section 18. Cicero then goes on to explain that poets are like gods and seem to have divine inspiration (divino spiritus) breathed into them (inflari). This seems like more of a general argument because Cicero states that all poets have this divine inspiration, not just Archias alone.
Beginning in line 228, Cicero uses a series of rhetorical questions to strengthen his argument and belief that Archias should be defended. “Should I not cherish him, should I not think that he ought to be defended by any means?” (Hunc ego noon diligam, non admirer, non omni ratione defendendum putem?)
6.
In section 10 Cicero talks about people with little or no skill who are inferior to Archias (such as actors) getting citizenship in Greece. Cicero argues that if these people can gain citizenship then questioning Archias’ citizenship is simply ridiculous. Cicero also says that many of the unskilled people who got citizenship snuck into the records illegally.
In section 25 Cicero says that if Archais were not a citizen by Roman laws then he could easily go to an army general and get citizenship that way. Cicero then talks about Sulla giving citizenship to the Spanish and the Galls and he also goes off on a tangent about another poet giving Sulla a badly written poem and Sulla in return gave the poet a gift on the condition that he would not write another poem. It would seem that this tangent would have nothing to do with Archais’ case, but Cicero brilliantly goes on to say that if a bad poet is worthy of even a small prize, then certainly Archais’ genius and virtue should be sought after (expetisset).
In both of these sections Cicero makes it clear that people who are less worthy than Archias are getting citizenship and rewards, therefore Archias should be able to get citizenship since he is obviously much more qualified.
I saw everything that was posted by 3PM Sunday. Nice jobs....Catullus questions will be more amusing. Remember to cite more Latin, short summaries are good. Strong work from most of you on poetic devices. mRo
Cicero Journal #5
In section 18 of Pro Archia Poeta Oratio, Cicero describes his feelings towards literature and poetry. In doing so, he also implores the rhetorical device of using a deliberative subjunctive.
This section is mainly about the glory of poets, and since Cicero’s friend Archis (who is a poet) and is on trial he’s trying to say that poets are great people. He even states “Quare suo ilure ille Ennius “sanctos” appellat poetas.” Translating to: wherefore rightly does our own great Ennius call poets holy. He is saying that Ennius, a very respected member of Roman society, calls poets holy. Cicero wants the judges to know how valuable a member of society Archius really is.
In line 229, he uses a deliberative subjunctive by saying “should I not love, not admire, not defend him in any possible way?” Cicero had earlier explained his great love and admiration for Archius, and poets by describing the many ways that poets look at the world.
I think that Cicero decided to structure this part of his argument in this manner to make it sound a little bit more like poetry. He’s spending his whole time talking about how poets take so much time to look, and look again at something, describe it, the describe it again, and that’s basically what he’s trying to do here. I actually like the way this sounds, and I think it’s a very effective way to get is point across.
Cicero Journal #6
In sections 10 and 25, Cicero talk about the various people to whom citizenship has been granted. In section 10, Cicero explains that many people were accustomed to having citizenship in many different cities. He goes on to explain that Archius, unlike the rest of the under qualified people, wished only to be granted citizenship in Heraclea (lines 130-131)
Section 25 is mainly about the emperor Sulla, who was giving citizenship to even the worst poets “malus poeta.” Cicero goes on to explain that Sulla gave to this worst poet, a gift so that he would stop writing poetry (hahahahah), after this malus poeta tried to write a little book (libellum) about Sulla. Cicero talks about this bad poet, and how even HE was rewarded with citizenship from the emperor. I think what Cicero is trying to say is that, if even this awful poet could get citizenship, should Archius being granted it as well, because he is a GREAT poet.
When Archius is writing about these things, he becomes very aggressive towards the people that have already been given citizenship, and becomes pretty bitter that his “brilliant” poet friend is not already a citizen. I find his tone a bit snappy and mean.
Cicero Journal #5
In part 18, Cicero builds his argument by expressing that Archias knows his own roots and how important his roots are. This relates to today through music. When a band covers a classic song, they admire their roots and their mentors, in the same way that Archias "repeat extempore a great number of admirable verses." Cicero uses Anticipation by asking "Should I not love this man? Should I not admire him?" to ask the opposition's question before they can ask it. This way he isnt put on the spot and can give his own reasoning.
Cicero Journal #6
In 10, Archias seems more worthy because he is compared to a stage actor who was given citizenship. Stage actors were looked down upon and were concidered to be very low. In 25 he is more worthy because I believe he is being compared to bad poets, who are obviously lower than a good poet such as Archias. The reasoning being if they let a bad poet or a stage actor to be a citizen, then why not let a good poet, higher than the other two, be a citizen. It sounds to me like Cicero thinks he is stating the obvious in order to make his case, and that he stacks up many points consecutively. It seems he already knows he has won.
sorry its a little late, the 405 getting out of LA was a parking lot.
Post a Comment