Horace, Ode I.-4, 'Solvitur acris hiems'

I have always regarded this little poem of Horace as rather sinister and, unlike his other similar pieces, devoid of all cheer and placidity. Here even wine is denied, Horace's usual offer to those whom he daunted with admonishments of the impending end of all. This impression is reinforced by the dismal metre (cf I.28), with its forceful pace and the strain it exerts on the voice; line 13 almost contains the possibility of a whole symphony (Mahler comes to mind). The wild evocation of the onset of spring sounds not so much charming as foreboding. The whole poem is so forbidding, so nonindulgent. And although the sportive references of the last three lines may suggest quite the opposite authorial intentions, the overall atmosphere is that of complete severance and irreversible wastage, almost of a Vanitas piece.

The charming English translation of L. E. Gielgud, of which I particularly like the last stanza, I hope will offer some relief after this depressing piece.

Corrigenda:

The year of Gielgud's translation is wrongly given as 1954 instead of 1951.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Horatius
• Quintus Horatius Flaccus
• Solvitur acris hiems
• Odes
• Carmina
• Latin poetry
• Latin
• Lewis Evelyn Gielgud
• Horace Odes
• Horace
• Scansion

[MFMSMITH]

This is one of the finest poems and your reader makes it sound ridiculous. Why should the tyranny of metre spoil the need to translate the sense? There is nothing ad hominem in my remarks and your word boorish implies a lack of manners. Truth - artistic truth - comes above manners; and in any case I was not impolite. You want to censor me! By what right!? I'm

making no dislike known, I am just responding to this poem which I presently intend to set. I advise you to read David West's translation.

[FannieAppleshine]

@MFMSMITH: I suspect that if only you had taken the time to read the description of this video this unpleasantry would have been avoided; for Gielgud's rendition was chosen for a reason. Best of luck in setting this poem and whatnot, but I merely *read* poetry (it is I who read) for the sake of reading it aloud and metrically, without artistic pretensions. That my voice and my accent may sound ridiculous, I will own, but I can conceive of no way of reading poetry without lilting.

[MFMSMITH]

Utterly useless 'translation' read in an absurd lilt and not even complete.

[FannieAppleshine]

@MFMSMITH: My dear fellow, I feel rotten about it, but I must ask you kindly to refrain from posting such beastly remarks here. I understand why one wouldn't care for this kind of English poetry or for a metrical reading thereof, but there are less boorish ways of making this dislike known to people.

[MaBu888]

@katiush65

More weirdness forever.

[MaBu888]

@katiush65

Most Latinists aren't good at vowel length distinction and pronunciation. I am.

[katiush65]

@MaBu888 lol Latinists are weird. But I understand.

[MaBu888]

I've become quite masterful at distinguishing all, even most obscurely known, vowel lengths. Not to brag.